CQUniversity Unit Profile.

Task Overview
This assessment develops your foundational skills as an investigator by requiring you to prepare a Scene Readiness Portfolio for an accident scenario provided in Moodle.

The portfolio demonstrates your ability to:

• plan and prepare for an investigation
• apply OHS principles to protect yourself and others
• identify early evidence‑preservation needs
• reflect on your developing investigative practice

This assessment prepares you for Assessment 2, where you will conduct a full accident scene investigation using SCENE2GO. 

Task Requirements
Your Scene Readiness Portfolio must contain two components. Part A is the Investigation plan brief, and Part B is the reflection and peer review. Part A will require you to complete the document as outlined below and upload it to the Moodle Assessment 1a area, and Part B, the same file will be uploaded for peer review and your reflection on that review.

Part A – Investigation Planning Brief for your team (approx. 1000–1200 words: 20 Marks)

Using the accident scenario description and details provided so far in Moodle. Prepare a structured planning document that includes:

1. Investigator Safety and OHS Requirements
Identify:

• hazards likely to be present at the scene
• required PPE
• controls you will implement to ensure your safety
• any legislative or organisational OHS obligations
• culturally safe practices

2. Initial Risk Assessment
Provide a brief risk assessment that includes:

• key risks
• likelihood and consequence
• control measures
• justification for your chosen controls

3. Scene Access and Control
Explain how you will:

• secure the scene
• establish safe access routes
• prevent contamination or disturbance of evidence
• manage interactions with workers, bystanders, or emergency services
• ensure ethical and respectful conduct

4. Logistics and Equipment

List the equipment you will bring and justify why each item is required.
Examples: camera, evidence markers, measuring tools, PPE, notebooks, lighting, etc.

5. Application of PEEPO or Similar Method
Explain how you will use the PEEPO method (People, Environment, Equipment, Procedures, Organisation), or a similar method, to orient yourself when you first arrive at the scene.

6. Pre‑Scene Evidence Preservation Strategy Identify:

• evidence that may be at risk of loss, contamination, or alteration
• immediate actions you would take to preserve it
• early continuity‑of‑evidence considerations (e.g., chain of custody, documentation, security)
• ethical considerations (e.g., privacy, respect for injured persons, cultural protocols)

You must demonstrate understanding of Week 4 content:

“What is evidence? · Rules of evidence · Why is getting it right so important?”

Submission Requirements

Submit one document (DOCX) containing:

• Title page
• Parts A
• Reference (Harvard)
  
  

Part B – Reflective Practice and Quality Feedback (approx. 200–500 words: 10 Marks) 

In this activity, you will give and receive feedback on your, Assessment task 1a. Load the Assessment 1 file (the same file you have/will load into Moodle). You will then review the submissions from one of your peers anonymously.  To complete this task, you will need to have Assessment 1a completed by the due date so that feedback and reflections can be completed by the following Wednesday.

Once you have finished giving feedback to one another, it is time to receive the feedback your peers provided on your work. It can be difficult to hear tough or critical feedback; like everything else, receiving feedback is a skill we, as lifelong learners, should continually develop.

Finally, you will read the review from your peers, reflect on them and answer the following questions:

1.      What did you learn about your own essay from reading the reviews from peers?

2.      Have you identified any additional changes you would make to your essay? If yes, give details.

Submission Requirements

Part B has its own Assessment area in Moodle, and completion of the task will provide full Marks.
 

Level of GenAI use allowed:
Level 2: You may use Al for planning, idea development, and research. Your final submission should show how you have developed and refined these ideas.

Investigation Planning Brief (Part A) (20%)

Reflective Practice (Part B) (10%)

Task Overview

This assessment requires you to conduct a structured accident scene investigation using the SCENE2GO 3D laser‑scanned environment.

You will apply the planning and readiness principles developed in Assessment 1 to:

1. analyse the scene
2. map the scene using traditional methods
3. identify and log evidence
4. evaluate evidentiary value
5. propose safety actions
6. demonstrate digital literacy and ethical practice

This assessment prepares you for Assessment 3, where you will interview a witness and complete a final investigation report.

Task Requirements
Your submission must include five components.

Part 1 – Scene Orientation & Initial Observations (approx. 400–600 words)

Answer the specific SCENE2GO scenario questions provided in Moodle.
You must also explain:

how your planning from Assessment 1 informed your approach
what changed once you viewed the actual scene
any new hazards, evidence, or scene features you identified
 

Part 2 – Traditional Scale Map (hand‑drawn)

Using measurements taken from the SCENE2GO scenario model, produce a hand‑drawn scale map that includes:

• North point
• Title block
• Two datum points
• Distances from datum points to at least two exhibits
• All evidence locations marked with crosses and exhibit numbers
• A clear scale (e.g., 1:100)

You must also include a short written justification (150–250 words) explaining:

• Which traditional mapping method you selected
• why it is appropriate for this scene
• how it supports later interviewing and evidence continuity
• how traditional and digital mapping complement each other

Tips

·         Use grid paper and coloured pens/pencils.
·         Refer to the Week 7 sketch plan presentation for guidance

Part 3 – Evidence Log
Part 3 A
Prepare a detailed evidence log listing all exhibits you would seize. Do not list photographs as evidence entries. Only include physical or digital exhibits that you would seize because they are useful in developing your investigation.

How to decide what evidence to collect

Think like an investigator: Not all items in the scene are relevant. Your role is to identify which exhibits genuinely help you:

·         Establish what happened
·         Support or challenge witness accounts
·         Identify causal and contributing factors
·         Withstand scrutiny in an interview or in court
Before deciding what to collect:

·         Read the briefing carefully.
·         Understand the sequence of events.
·         Consider how each exhibit might help reveal causation factors (e.g. human, equipment, environment, organisational).
For each item, include:

• exhibit number
• description
• location
• condition
• relevance
• whether it requires clarification during witness interviews
• Evaluating evidential value

For each potential exhibit, ask yourself:

·         What evidential value does this item provide?
·         How could it be used in an interview or in court?
·         Does it help prove or disprove a hypothesis about how the accident occurred?
·         Is it directly connected to the incident, or just background “noise”?
In this scenario, there are several key primary exhibits that are likely to be important—for example:

·         The bicycle
·         The work vehicle
·         Any relevant parts, components, or equipment
·         Items or locations that may require expert examination or testing (e.g. mechanical, medical, or scientific analysis)
Consider whether you may need:

·         Expert reports (e.g. mechanical inspection, braking performance, lighting, visibility)
·         Medical or scientific analysis (e.g. toxicology, fitness for work, medical conditions)
Also think ahead: If a witness or driver later raises a mechanical fault or medical issue as a defence, will you already have the right evidence to test that claim? If not, you may have lost the opportunity—once the scene changes, you usually cannot recreate the original conditions.
Forensic thinking and proportionality
Remember:

·         Forensic evidence alone is not enough. It must be supported by other information such as documents, interviews, and scene observations.
·         Not every item at the scene is an exhibit. Some things only need to be photographed, not seized.
·         Some items must be collected for further expert examination or potential court presentation.
·         Some items are not relevant at all and offer no evidential value.
Avoid the “CSI effect” mindset of collecting everything “just in case.” Instead:

·         Think Forensically.
·         Decide what you must take and what you can leave.
·         Ensure your decisions are viable, proportionate, and justifiable.
If you are genuinely unsure and can articulate a reasonable justification, you may decide to collect an item and later return or release it if it proves to have no evidential value.

Part 3 B
Produce 7 photographs demonstrating basic forensic photography techniques using any safe, staged environment. These must include:

·         4 overall/orientation shots, linked photos of the overall scene that include the exhibit for the next 2 photographs

·         1 x  mid‑range shot, including a number marker and a small amount of background detail

·         1 x close‑up shot, one photo with and one photo without the number marker, make sure you fill the camera frame with your subject

·         1 x technical photo, closest you can possibly get with your camera for a photo of damage or mark or an interesting detail on your exhibit, must include a ruler for measurement, camera lens needs to be parallel to object, not slanted, include a smaller exhibit marker here also. This may be a different exhibit.

For 3 photos, you must also provide the metadata. To do this, save each photo to your computer desktop, right‑click the file, select Properties, then Details. We need to see the shutter speed, F‑stop, date, time, and whether flash was used.

Do not include photographs in the log; they are to be added to the end of the log as an appendix, and the metadata is to be included with each photo for which it is saved.

Part 4 – Evidence Analysis (approx. 600–800 words total)

For each evidence item, provide a short paragraph addressing:

• why you collected it
• what it may prove
• how it contributes to investigative leads
• whether expert analysis is required and what it may determine
• how it relates to the rules of evidence
• any ethical or cultural considerations for the collection and storage
•  

Submission Requirements
Upload the following files:

• Activity assessment document (Parts 1, 3, 4, 5)
• Scale map (Part 2)
• Evidence log with photos (Part 3)

Note: Parts 2 and 3 can be included in the same file as parts 1,3-4

Level of GenAI use allowed:
Level 2: You may use Al for planning, idea development, and research. Your final submission should show how you have developed and refined these ideas.

Scene Orientation & Initial Observations (Part 1) (10%)
Traditional Scale Map (Part 2) (10%)
Evidence Log & Photography (Part 3) (10%)
Evidence Analysis (Part 4) (10%)

Task Overview 
This assessment completes the investigative cycle by requiring you to:

• prepare a PEACE‑based interview plan
• conduct a real witness interview
• produce a structured witness statement
• synthesise scene evidence and testimony into a final investigation report
• demonstrate culturally respectful interviewing practice

This assessment draws heavily on your work in Assessments 1 and 2.

Task Requirements
Your submission must include three components.

Part A – PEACE Interview Plan (approx. 600–800 words)

Prepare a structured interview plan for interviewing the driver (or key witness) from the SCENE2GO accident scenario.

Your plan must include:

1. Planning & Preparation

• room setup
• privacy considerations
• rapport‑building strategies
• legal and ethical considerations
• materials required
• culturally safe interviewing practices
• considerations for interviewing First Nations witnesses

2. Question Set (minimum 25 questions)
Use TEDs and 5WH+H to develop high‑quality questions.
Questions must:

• be open‑ended where appropriate
• probe evidence collected in Assessment 2
• clarify inconsistencies or unknowns
• follow a logical sequence
• demonstrate cultural sensitivity

3. Timeline of Events
Prepare a factual timeline based on the footage and details in SCENE2GO scenario.
Include:

• timestamps
• key movements
• impact point
• actions of the cyclist and driver

Part B – Witness Interview & Statement (approx. 1–2 pages) 

Interview a friend or relative who has witnessed or been involved in an accident. Make written notes on the questions asked and attach them to the statement. Although there is no word limit on this assessment, you are unlikely to be successful with a statement less than one page, but a maximum of two pages.

Basic Steps:

1.    Identify a suitable witness (friend or relative).

2.    Conduct an interview using the provided interview structure to obtain a detailed account.

3.    Prepare a written witness statement using the Written Witness Content guidance from the lecture slides. 

4.    Record the interview with the consent of the witness. Audio of the witness is required; however, it is preferred if there is video of you doing the interview. 

You must:

• follow the PEACE structure
• obtain a detailed account
• write a structured witness statement in the first person
• use the witness’s natural language style
• demonstrate cultural respect and ethical practice
• include introduction, scene description, narrative, and observations

Do not fabricate events.

Do not use AI.

Part C – Mini Investigation Report (approx. 1,000–1,500 words)

Integrate your findings from Assessment 2 and your witness interview (based on a possible statement).

Your report must include:

• introduction and scope
• summary of scene evidence
• summary of witness testimony (based on a possible statement)
• analysis of consistencies and inconsistencies
• application of rules of evidence
• culturally informed considerations
• final conclusions

Four (4) Safety Actions (to be included in the report)
You will develop four high‑quality safety actions designed to prevent a similar vehicle–cyclist collision from occurring at this worksite. Your actions must be based on the Hierarchy of Control, and you are required to include at least one Elimination control and at least one Engineering control. These actions should reflect the type of improvements commonly issued by safety regulators (e.g., WorkSafe) as improvement notices, or those developed internally by Safety Advisors following an incident investigation.

Provide four (4) safety actions, each outlining the safety action you would implement to reduce the risk of future vehicle–cyclist interactions. For each action, you must:

·       Explain the action clearly

·       Describe how it would prevent recurrence of this type of incident

·       Identify which level of the Hierarchy of Control it represents (Elimination, Substitution, Engineering, Administrative, or PPE)

Your actions must be relevant to the scene, achievable, and demonstrate sound hazard‑control reasoning. You may draw on your own professional experience, provided your recommendations align with the conditions and contributing factors present in this scenario.

To strengthen the quality and defensibility of your actions, you may apply the S.M.A.R.T. framework:

 S – Specific | M – Measurable | A – Achievable | R – Realistic | T – Time‑bound

Submission Requirements

Submit document/s containing:

• Part A
• Part B
• Part C
• Reference list (if used)
  
  

Level of GenAI use allowed:
Level 1: You must not use AI at any point during the assessment. You must demonstrate your core skills and knowledge.

PEACE Interview Plan (Part A) (5%)
Witness Interview & Statement (Part B) (10%)
Mini Investigation Report (Part C) (10%)
Safety Actions (5%)