Collection Of Evidence In Court Cases

It does not matter the reputation you have earned for your high integrity and honesty, you will always be open to allegations of civil or criminal liability. The first type of evidence and usually the most obvious is physical evidence. Evidence can be anything from tangible objects such as cartridge cases and firearms to latent fingerprints and DNA. Evidence collection or recovery step in crime scene processing is the methods, techniques, and procedures used in retrieving evidence. Patience and care are very important at the crime scene. The criminalist should take the proper time and care in processing the scene. The work is tedious and time consuming.

The gathering, protection and safeguarding of evidence is a crucial facet of evidence integrity, without accurate adherence to these processes, vital evidence that could possibly have significant influence on a court case could be deemed inadmissible. Therefore identifies the importance in establishing policy and procedure for law enforcement agencies in the identification, collection, and storage of evidence. Objects that constitute fruits, instrumentalities, or evidence of the crime or are contraband may be introduced in evidence and exhibited to the jury if it is proven that such objects offered as evidence relate to the crime charged (Garland, 2015, p. 417). Below is a procedure for handling physical evidence for presentation

On 1/9/2016 at approximately 2345 hours I, Officer Nelson #3912, responded to 1350 Hickory St. (Holmes Regional Medical Center) in reference to a fight that had just occurred.

Examining the witness statements it can be concluded that the alleged offence had taken place at a crowded nightclub with Low lighting and alcohol being served.

After the crime is first reported, the law enforcement officers must open an investigation. Within the investigation, witnesses must be interviewed separately by police, along with the victims, and suspects. Crime scene technicians should also be contacted to collect any type of evidence from DNA, fingerprints, and blood samples. After possible incriminating evidence is collected, it must be sent back to the lab for testing.

When dealing with other types of evidence such as hairs and fibers, tool marks, video footage, or even a weapon used at a crime scene; it can be challenging connecting the evidence to the suspect or even coming up with a suspect. These forms of evidence have been allowed in court in many cases and have also convicted many innocent people. Years later, their cases have been re-opened with new DNA evidence and have set the innocent free. According to the Innocence Project, Randolf Arledge was accused and convicted for murder. This article states that, “in 2011, they secured DNA testing of the physical evidence with the cooperation of the Navarro County District Attorney’s Office. The testing included hair samples from the hairnet and washings from the victim’s pubic hairs.” (Innocence Project , n.d.) With these findings it exonerated Arledge revealing the real perpetrator known as David Sims. Another case that was also exonerated due to later DNA findings occurred in 2003. “A Virginia man was released from prison after a post-conviction. DNA test proved that he did not rape a nursing student in 1981. The man spent two decades in prison after being convicted of breaking into the women’s apartment and raping her. Two juries failed to reach a verdict, but the third jury found him guilty.” (The United States Department of Justice, 2014). The argument at hand is many feel DNA analysis is not most effective, when it has become the one form of evidence that have saved people’s lives.

While circumstantial evidence may be used to prove knowledge, the State did not meet its burden of proof. When determining if a person had knowledge, a court will look at the following factors: “incriminating statements made by the defendant, incriminating actions of the defendant upon the police’s discovery of drugs among or near the defendant’s personal belongings, the defendant’s fingerprints on the packages containing the drugs, and any other circumstances linking the defendant to the drugs.” These factors were not present in Fischer and no other factors the majority used linked Fischer to the drug, and thus established “knowingly” element beyond a reasonable doubt.

They have to make sure that before they entered the crime scene, nothing in the scene should have been moved. While they are going through a walk-through, they may have to construct theories about what happened in the crime scene based on visual examination. Investigators have to take photographs of the scene and will later on be collected. Taking photographs of the scene will help them solve the crime because there are some points of the investigation that investigators may have overlooked evidence, and that evidence could be found in the photographs. After taking photographs of the scene, they will start to collect clue and evidence that may lead them to their possible suspect(s). What they may find in the crime scene are fingerprints which can be done using colored powder and a brush, other thizngs such as blood, firearms, hair, glass and many more things that can be found in the crime scenes.

3. The role of the prosecutor is to decide which evidence should be presented and which is the best way to present it. Evidence is chosen based on what is best fitted to present the case and helps to build towards a guilty verdict against the offender. Judges give the final stamp of approval on all evidence presented in a case. They are given power to either admit or omit evidence based on prosecutorial or defense objects which will require interpretation of the law. The jury’s duty is to review and interpret the evidence in order to find the truth within it. During criminal trials they are meant to decide if the evidence can prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

In chapter one of this text, it discusses the development and history of the law of criminal evidence. The majority of the rules in evidence were created in the courts of England. Today, persons charged with criminal offenses are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Defendants today can admit or be in denial from a charge, and if the charge is in fact denied, then the government must come forward with substantial, reliable, and valid information showing this person is in fact guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. However, the rules and regulations now were not always present. They progressed maturely over the course of history, many were embedded into what is known as common law, and a lot them were created as a piece of the Constitution on the

What do you know about crime scene investigations other than what you see on TV? Crime scenes vary with the amount of physical evidence which is ordinarily expected to be recovered. The only thing consistent about crimes scenes is their inconsistency. A crime scene investigation can described as the application of what has become known as “Locard Exchange Principle”. The “Locard Exchange Principle” is mainly a theory that was established by “Dr. Edmond Locard”. Crime scene investigator document crime scenes in detail and collect physical evidence. Crime scene investigators include recorder to record the data, sketch artists to sketch the scene, photographers to take photos of the crime scene and evidence collectors.

In my opinion, I think when the court is allow evidence of prior criminal history, then it should be setting a period and not allowing history that is from too long ago. Defendant might already served or respond for what they had done in the past. The criminal history record might be use it for a reference but shouldn’t be use it as a fact. When bringing out the criminal history on the case, it might not be always fair to the defendant. So, I think it really depend on case

Identification is the first proof of an offence in any indictment. It is essential that the police officer has a detailed description to determine the identification of the accused (Preparation of Police Statements, 2017). Constable Ellis correctly identified the accused by way of the accused drivers licence. By correctly identifying the offender can determine the course of action that is taken. For example, A Field Court Attendance Notice can be issued instead of arresting the offender and taking them back to the station to be charged. Identity of a person, place or thing is a hearsay exception and may be admitted in to evidence under section 66, subsection 3 of the Evidence Act 1995. Hearsay evidence is not admissible in court unless it meets

Law of evidence is an important and a very effective part of the justice system. In Common Law there are many laws crated at different times in history to improve the standards of evidence in evidence law to eliminate the perjury from evidence and many different sets of laws were introduced.

Today, more than ever, the quality of evidence in criminal cases is scrutinized because of contamination. Contamination is the introduction of something that physically corrupts a substance at a crime scene that was not previously there; it comes in many forms and most often times comes from the humans who investigate a crime scene. It is imperative that prevention of cross-contamination is implemented when gathering evidence. Several of the more sensitive forensic techniques such as trace analysis, bloodspatter interpretation, and DNA comparison are not being used to their fullest potential. Items of physical crime scene evidence are not always visible to the naked eye and may be easily overlooked so deliberate and methodical approach to collection and preservation of evidence is essential. Prosecutors have lost cases due to crime scene contamination; this could be prevented by simple and productive behaviors. The U.S. Supreme Court, in a leading case on physical evidence, stated: