Court Testimony Essay example

The expert testimony in the Wayne Williams case was vital in explaining the evidence to the jury (Imwinkelried, 1983). It is reasonable to concede that jurors have no prior knowledge of forensic science. Additionally, jurors will most likely have no prior knowledge of the different variations, color spectrums, moreover the uniqueness of various items presented as evidence in this case. As a prosecutor, it would important to include the testimony of fiber experts with extensive knowledge of the article presented. This expert would be able to articulate to the jury the unique qualities as well as characteristics of the fibers.

More shockingly the justice department and FBI have formally acknowledged that virtually every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which evidence was supplied against criminal defendants in the period of 20 years prior to 2000. In a group of 28 examiners with the FBI Laboratory 26 have been confirmed to overstating matches in microscopic hair comparison in favor of prosecutors. This was seen in 95 percent of the 268 trials that have been reviewed so far in accordance to the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) and the Innocence Project. The errors in the FBI’s conduct does not mean that there was no other evidence of the convict’s guilt, however federal and state prosecutors

In April of 2015, the field of forensic science suffered a major shock after the FBI announced that the hair analysis testimony that it had used to investigate criminal suspects was flawed. legal scholar Tucker Carrington stated that the FBI hair analysis being performed was “magic”, it was considered that because its hair analysis investigations were unscientific. The evidence that was presented on trial was considered to be unreliable. In about 95% of cases it was discovered that analysts stated their conclusion in order to favor prosicuters. False testemonies occurred in over 100 trials, including 32 death penalty cases. But FBI was not done with their announcements, they also revealed that

Juvenal was a Roman Satirist active in the late 1st and early 2nd century AD

Everyone knows that trichology is the study of hair. Interestingly, this study dates back to mid-1800s. However, hair analysis in forensic science began in 1930. During which time, a forensic scientist by the name of Edmond Locard introduced the Locard Exchange Principal. This principal hinges on the fact that any time there is contact between two surfaces an exchange of material will take place. (Oien, 2009) In this paper, I will prove how Forensic Hair Analysis and Forensic Hair comparison and studies if properly performed and correctly interpreted hair analysis meets all the scientific method standards.

The Crime Scene Investigation Module video on Hair provides a great deal of information. This training session is about how the

The traditional methods of solving a crime scene is by using witnesses and confessions of the suspect. That method can work but there is now the method of using forensic evidence to link a suspect to a crime and potentially solve it, as well. In the being, the use of DNA evidence was seen as being controversial and challenging by the defense attorneys, even though there were about 17,000 and more cases that used DNA test in 1997. 1 It is important to remember that DNA is not the only type of forensic evidence but it is the focus of this paper.

In the forensic science field, laboratory tests are becoming more criticized in today 's world of technology. Human hair is one of the most common types of evidence found at a crime scene. Following hair analysis, there is also DNA fingerprinting analysis. Many victims of this flaw have been wrongfully sent to serve time for these flaws in testing. There have recently been more strategies to help improve these tests and provide for a better outcome in trial. Labs now have certain guidelines to follow while running tests, and at crime scenes, investigators are taking precautionary measures when collecting evidence to test. The forensic science field is one of the most powerful parts of the criminal justice system. They help separate the

Having a witness on your side could be the key to helping you win your court case. The problem is that the witness could refuse to go to court to help you out. Your lawyer can try to compel the witness to testify on your behalf, but there are some situations that can excuse the witness from doing so.

This is interrelated with Gabel & Wilkinson (2003) argument that even though Microscopic hair analysis has been used in cases dating back 1900's and has many advantages, there are still, however, some issues regarding its technique. This analysis allows the comparison of particles of hairs found at the crime scene with those of the suspect's. If a match is found, then this states who the defendant is, based on this comparison. Gabel & Wilkinson (2003) argue that microscopic hair examination has very little value outside of a crime scene investigation. Due to this, it receives little attention from the scientific realm. "It has limited exposure to peer review, proficiency testing and the error ratings are more than enough to present this technique

No matter what I say, I cannot make anyone kneel or stand; nobody can. It is our right and that is what makes America what it is. If you did this in Germany in the 1940s, you would be executed. The fact that we can protest whatever we choose is what makes America great to me. Although I can criticize the NFL for kneeling for the wrong things and criticize Trump for making such a huge deal out of it in the first place, in the end they can do what they want. The NFL can kneel or stand all they want and Donald Trump can complain about it all they want, in the end they all have the right to stand up for what they believe in.

Each strand of hair possesses a variety of characteristics which include: length, color, shape, root appearance, and microscopic characteristics which can identify its origin on the body. Hair can be found on many different regions of the body which include the head, pubic region, legs, arms, chest, and axillae (armpit), amongst

This result required analysis from another technician, who ultimately concluded that some of the samples were consistent with Fritz’ hair.  It took this expert over two years to do his analysis, and he did so with the knowledge that when he was analyzing Fritz’ hair, Fritz was a suspect in the case.  (Other hair samples that he analyzed were not marked as having come from a suspect). [*604]

In recent decades, there has been wide controversy over forensic science in criminal justice and it’s credibility. Criminal justice system relies on forensic evidence, which includes bite-mark and hair analysis, to convict criminals. People began questioning the legitimacy when the FBI admitted to the flaws in hair analysis in hundreds of cases that occurred over decades before the 2000s. Not only those cases but many others in which the evidence was not scientific legitimate. According to The National Registry of Exonerations, more than 2,000 people have been exonerated in recent decades. More than 400 of those, were because of misleading or flawed evidence. This all has proven that these methods used for hundreds and thousands of years need to be fixed and changed. In the state of Texas for example, they have a reorganized commission that is working to improve forensic science within the state. The issue is also the prosecutors and many in the criminal justice system. They defend these methods because of its long-standing practice. Which has already proven, that it is not credible in proving someone’s innocence and it has cost many of people’s lives.

Our joint review of lab examiner’s testimony revealed that at least 90 percent of trial transcripts contained erroneous statements relating to forensic hair analysis (Yates, 2016).