A History of the Utah State Bureau of Identification and Investigation

Utah Historical Quarterly

Vol. 24, 1956, Nos. 1-4

A HISTORY OF THE UTAH STATE BUREAU OF CRIMINAL IDENTIFICATION AND INVESTIGATION

BY ROBERT M. GRAY

IT IS a long step from the first efforts of fingerprinting in the state of Utah, thirty-eight years ago, to the established Utah State Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation of today. The Utah Bureau is primarily the result of the efforts of Richard H. Wootton and the Utah State Police Association. Wootton directed the operations of the bureau from its founding in 1923 until he retired in March, 1949.

Richard Wootton was born December 20, 1881, in Midway, Wasatch County, Utah, where he lived many years. After completing high school, he worked on his father's farm during the summer months and hauled lumber and worked on railroad construction during other months of the year.

In 1912 he joined the Ogden City Police Department where he worked as a patrolman for eight months. He was then made a plain-clothesman and soon rose to the rank of detective. While in this position, he obtained a ninety-day leave of absence and went back to railroading. It was during such a leave that a close friend was elected sheriff of Weber County. At the request of the sheriff, Wootton joined the staff in January, 1917, and remained there for the next four years. This period covered the years of World War I, and it was an incident which occurred during this time that gave Wootton an incentive to study fingerprinting.

A young man dressed in a United States Army uniform was brought into the sheriff's office suffering from loss of memory. He could neither talk nor write. He had no dog-tag or other means of identification on his person. The young man received medical treatment at the Dee Hospital in Ogden for the next four or five weeks, and then it was decided to send him to the Utah State Mental Hospital. Wootton was assigned to take the young man to Provo, and while on the way he became interested in the case. Six months later, the unknown man died and was buried in the cemetery of the mental hospital—his identity still unknown. Wootton was saddened by this incident, and he promised himself that such a thing would never happen again if it were possible for him to prevent it.

Through visits to some of the larger police departments in the United States, Wootton gained some knowledge of fingerprinting. He became avid for information and sought out and read everything he could find on the subject. Thus he learned of the University of Applied Science of Chicago, which was, and still is, a leading identification school in the United States. He completed their correspondence course, received his degree, and all the while gained practical experience in the Weber County Sheriff's Department—later in the Ogden Police Department, and still later as deputy warden of the Utah State Prison. Wootton organized and put into operation the first fingerprint identification division in the state of Utah in the Weber County Sheriff's Department in 1917. Upon returning to the Ogden Police Department in January, 1921, he organized and put into operation the second fingerprint identification department.

By 1920, he had aroused the interest of the law enforcement officers throughout Utah in the idea of establishing an association of peace officers on a statewide level. In 1921, he was successful in getting such an association organized and he became its first president. This organization is now known as the Utah Peace Officers Association.

In 1925, at the request of the governor and prison officials, Wootton accepted the position of deputy warden at the Utah State Prison, where he immediately established the prison identification system. While at the prison he was able to further his research and widen his interest in the field of fingerprint identification.

In connection with his varied activities, Wootton visited and studied the California State Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation, and was quite impressed with its methods, scope, and functions. Though only four other highly populated states had bureaus at this time, Wootton decided that a bureau would be very valuable to the law enforcement officers of Utah.

In his report of his visit to the California Bureau at the next meeting of the Utah Peace Officers Association, he convinced the members of the need for a central department for keeping recOrds and co-ordinating identification and investigation work throughout the state. As a result, the association appointed a legislative committee to prepare a bill for introduction into the next session of the Utah State Legislature, and, encouraged by the progress and results being shown by other state bureaus, the association lobbied for passage of a bill to create a Utah Bureau. House Bill 62 was passed March 10, 1927, and was approved by the governor March 16, 1927. The bill entitled, "Creating a State Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation," provided for its organization, defined its powers and duties, and made an appropriation to carry out the provisions of the law. Mr. Wootton was appointed director, and he, with a typist, organized the newly created bureau.

It was decided that the fingerprint file at the prison should form the nucleus of the state bureau and that they should be transferred to offices in the Capitol. Unfortunately, however, there was no space in the building at this time, and a meager budget would not permit rental of office space. The problem of where to set up the office was given to Mr. Wootton. He had to act quickly! Results had to be shown in order to convince the governor and the legislature of the feasibility of operating for the next biennium. It was decided to search the State Capitol in hopes of finding some spot which could be used. A site in the basement was selected as suitable under the circumstances, and, along with the custodian, Wootton cleaned and converted a dark hallway into an office. The problem of supplying furniture and office fixtures, with no money in the budget for such necessities, was faced; but discarded furniture was repaired, and soon the office was furnished and functioning well, considering the outlook a few days previous. The board of managers left Mr. Wootton plenty of lee-way to act as he saw fit in organizing the bureau. After a few weeks of organizing office procedures, making contacts with other agencies, classifying, indexing, and cross-indexing of fingerprints, the bureau started to show results. Fortunately, Utah managed to escape one of the hazards which nearly wrecked earlier state bureaus, for at the suggestion of the California Bureau, the legislature was urged to pass a law making it mandatory for all local police departments to co-operate.

Records from the State Prison, along with the hundreds sent in by identification bureaus and local police departments, gave the bureau around 10,000 criminal records. These records were accurately and systematically classified, indexed, and crossindexed in a manner that when filed they were easily and readily accessible.

From within the state during the first year, 2,569 fingerprint cards were received, and of these, 505 were identified and a report quickly sent back to the waiting police agency. During the same period, 1,619 fingerprint cards were sent into the bureau from out of state agencies. Of these, 98 were positively identified. At the end of the first year the bureau had on file 16,755 nameindex cards and 2,987 criminal record cards on persons who had been arrested more than once. Already one of the principles upon which the bureau was formulated was manifesting itself—three-fourths of all criminals arrested were of the habitual type, operating within a limited environment.

Early success had made it likely that the bureau would stay in operation as a permanent state department. Many police officials welcomed the assistance offered them, and new co-ordination and co-operation between most local departments developed because of this service.

Wootton made recommendations to the governor, which, if put into operation, would have provided other services to the local police officer. It was proposed that professionally trained criminal investigators be hired, these men to confine their efforts entirely to the investigation of major crimes committed in the state. These investigators would assist municipalities and counties in their pursuit of criminals. It was argued that many of the smaller police departments were unable to cope with the specialized and organized criminals who operated in their districts from time to time. Still further, the state investigator would be backed by the organized asistance of all the police agencies of the state, which was not the case of the independent department.

Another recommendation was that a scientific laboratory be attached to the state bureau, wherein all problems referable to the chemical analyst and ballistic expert might be quickly reported to the waiting police department. This service was needed by the police officers of the state, and many of them urged the governor to put this into law. Unfortunately, due to a lack of funds, neither of these recommendations was carried out and the bureau was compelled to carry on as best it could with the limited resources.

By 1930 the bureau had grown considerably from its meager beginnings in 1927. Appropriations had been raised from $12,- 000.00 to $15,750.00, which allowed the bureau to operate on a wider plane. It was now possible to subscribe to a few pertinent publications and periodicals. Likewise, it was possible to expend funds in traveling to the various police departments in the state, thus co-ordinating the services of these departments.

The bureau received a total of 12,420 fingerprint cards during this period, and of these, 2,161, or a little more than 17 per cent were identified as persons having a prior criminal record. Some of these persons were wanted as escapees, parole violators, or fugitives from other states. These men were sent back to their own state and the savings to the state of Utah amounted to several thousand dollars.

The statistical section of the bureau was organized in 1929. The function of this department was to gather and systematize statistics on crime in the state. One of the first duties of the new division was to obtain the co-operation and assistance of the local police agencies. Shortly, most of the city and county departments were sending in monthly reports of all offenses committed in their districts. The reports were then consolidated and prepared into statistical graphs and charts showing crime trends in the state. This material was sent to the various local police agencies, and they in turn used this information in their attack on crime in their locality.

The bureau was growing rapidly, and its position as a permanent state function was established. However, certain things still threatened the continued existence of the bureau. Among these negative influences were the limited budget and the poor co-operation of some sheriff and police department factors. This information was brought to the attention of the Police Chiefs Association, and they at once undertook an educational program aimed at interesting these few departments in the value of scientific identification. This was quite successful, and a large percentage of the non-co-operating departments soon were sending in reports and using the services of the bureau. The second notable weakness was overcome when the state legislature, in 1931, recognized the growing value of the Utah Bureau to the people of the state by increasing its appropriation for the' next biennium to $17,000.00. This meant that a number of improvements could be made.

With the advent of the year, 1938, the Utah Bureau was functioning on an effective level, but was far from the standards being maintained by bureaus in more progressive states. Mr. Wootton, as superintendent, repeatedly made requests for new services—equipment, trained investigators, better co-operation with local officers, etc., which would bring the Utah Bureau on a par with most other state bureaus. Being denied many of these requested services, Wootton chose to put into operation a few of them on a very limited scale. The bureau likewise continued operating a few of the other services, which had been in operation before the depression, on a skeleton basis. The limited operations of the laboratory were continued. It was possible to make simple tests—to identify bullets, to take latent fingerprints, to identify firearms, and to do photographic work.

Due to personnel shortages the statistical division was compelled to continue with the limited system then in operation, which consisted of recording the number of fingerprint cards and other identification data received and sent out. There was little value in this activity to the law enforcement officers of the state, but bureau personnel were being adequately trained so that if added funds were at sometime in the future a reality, extended operations could be quickly adopted.

The 1941 state legislature appropriated $19,000.00 for the bureau, which was a marked improvement over the previous years. The bureau was now receiving and processing more records than ever before, and in addition to this extra work there were the many records already on file which had to be continually processed in order to keep the bureau up-to-date.

During this period, 40,530 fingerprint cards were received, which, added to the 196,126 already on file, made a total of 236,656. This figure is remarkable when one considers the population of the state of Utah and the surrounding states. Widi these fingerprints, the Utah Bureau was able to identify 21 per cent as persons having a prior criminal record. The index division received and processed another 44,781 cards, and when added to the 242,315 on hand, made a totalof 268,096. The criminal record division received 5,554 cards which raised the number of criminal record cards to a new total of 40,974. The photograph division added 5,554 photographs, to make a total of 48,040 criminal photographs on file. From the Identification Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, 9,571 criminal record reports or notifications of prisoners wanted, were received. Other state bureaus sent in 2,748 notifications, which, when totaled together, made a total of 12,519.

World War II brought additional work. It also meant that the bureau would be in a position to offer a valuable service to the nation during this time of emergency. Federal agencies and defense plants immediately started to ask for reports on their personnel. The United States Army, Navy, Coast Guard, Marine Corps and the Merchant Marine sent in reports on all subjects enlisting from the state of Utah. The bureau co-operated with these agencies and identified a number of their personnel as being ex-criminals.

The FBI received copies of all fingerprints received at the Utah Bureau. These, together with those records sent in by the other state bureaus, literally swamped the national bureau. Thus, the state bureau proved to be a highly important agency in wartime.

Congress in 1943, received and took into consideration two bills which were sponsored by state identification bureaus. The first bill would require all citizens over the age of sixteen to be fingerprinted and to carry an identification card. This bill, H. R. 6256, along with the other bill, H. R. 6258, would require all aliens to be fingerprinted. Neither of these bills was passed.

During the two years, 1943 and 1944, the bureau received 44,741 fingerprint cards. The total number of records received on criminals was considerably less, due to the fact that so many of the men were in the armed services, and others held high-paying jobs in war industries. Of those individuals arrested for criminal offenses, twenty-three percent were identified, which is an even higher percentage than the previous twenty-one per cent.

The bureau had purchased a number of scientific tools in order to provide a greater service to the police agencies of the state. This crime detection equipment permitted the identification expert to aid the small police department in combating crime on a plane similar to the highly organized department. Yet, the bureau still did not have the facilities necessary to do the work in the manner desired. They needed laboratory equipment, facilities for microscopic and chemical analysis, firearm examination material and equipment necessary for other investigations.

During the next two years, 1945 and 1946, practically the same conditions prevailed in that much of the work was in connection with the various war agencies throughout the nation. It included the classifying and filing of fingerprints of persons entering the armed forces and co-operating with federal, state, and local agencies in making certain that persons holding responsible positions were of suitable character.

Wootton, a leader in the attack on crime in the intermountain west, recognized and brought to the attention of the police officers of the state the number of violent crimes being committed. His assumption at this time was that the aftermath of the war would result in a still larger number of this type of crime, and he urged the state police officers to prepare for this increase. Such information was brought to the attention of all police officials in the state through a monthly publication put out by the Utah Bureau. In addition, Wootton gave a number of talks on the subject and urged the state to be prepared for the critical period after the war. Mr. Wootton brought out the fact that many of the local police agencies of the state were unable to cope with the problems they were now facing, let alone the expected increase. He proposed a solution which would give Utah a first-rate police set-up far superior to the one in operation. This was to establish, in addition to the existing services, some type of central state law enforcement agency, the duties of which would be to co-operate with and co-ordinate the services of all the local departments in the state. The proposed central agency would also give the local departments the benefit of trained investigators and modern up-to-date equipment for conducting scientific investigations.

The Utah Bureau started preparing for the anticipated increase in crime, and at the same time urged the state police officials to support such a program as Wootton had suggested. However, the Utah State Legislature in 1945 saw fit to by-pass this recommendation, and the new program was not put into operation. They did, however, increase the appropriations to the bureau, giving them a sorely needed shot-in-the-arm. The appropriation of $29,150.00 was the highest figure yet given to the state bureau, and during the next two year period, 1946 to 1948, the bureau received new increases in the number of records on file in each division. The state met the problem of the anticipated increase in crime as best it could, each individual agency working on its own cases and using the facilities of the Utah Bureau and the FBI.

Though a budget cut was threatened after the 1948 election, the bureau managed to receive an appropriation of $35,000.00 for the 1949-51 biennium. Mr. Wootton retired in March, 1949, and James Faust took over as temporary director of the bureau. Mr. Faust had been the assistant director for a period of fourteen years and was an important factor in the progress of the bureau.

Governor Lee appointed Peter Dow, former head of the Utah State Highway Patrol, as director of the Utah State Bureau of Identification on April 1, 1949. Mr. Dow took office and promptly went to work adding to the services organized by Wootton and bureau personnel. Because of his affiliations with the State Highway Patrol, Dow was well acquainted with police officials throughout the state. They appreciated his work while on the state patrol and co-operated well with him in working out the most satisfactory organization. Governor Lee has taken an interest in the bureau as manifested by his many meetings with Mr. Dow and his repeated visits to the bureau office.

A new automobile has been added to the facilities of the bureau, and it is now possible for bureau personnel, without driving their own cars, to visit local police departments throughout the state. These visits will serve the purpose of increasing the co-ordination and co-operation of all police agencies of the state, and at the same time, will give the bureau an opportunity to widen its service to many departments not now co-operating in the program. The future seems to favor continuing success for the Utah State Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation.