Evidence And Forensic: Due Process

The popular television show, CSI: Crime Scene Investigations has been on the air for 12 years, and it has brought forth the behind-the-scenes actions of criminal investigations, even if its portrayals are not always scientifically accurate. This has caused an interest in the forensic sciences that has led most people to a skewed view of how a criminal investigation actually works. The reality of a criminal investigation is that it is generally more tedious and difficult than the theory of criminal investigation would have you believe. By examining the forensic and investigative procedures of the case of Pamela Foddrill, it is apparent that the theory of criminal investigation was not representative of the procedures concerning examination

Forensic science and law are often seen as two opposing disciplines; forensic science is often presumed to be factual and law can be interpreted in multiple ways. Science and law reach conclusions in different ways which is an issue. Due to these differences, miscommunication is often the cause for miscarriages of justice. In order to address this problem, people working in the criminal justice system should have more knowledge of forensic science. There are many factors that contribute to the lack of understanding between forensic science and the people involved in the court process. Firstly, the adversarial model will be discussed in relation to how these procedures prevent effective communication between forensic evidence and lawyers. Secondly, the role that expert witnesses play in the presentation of scientific evidence and how jurors play a role in interpreting their evidence, will be considered. Thirdly it will be argued that lawyers and judges lack adequate knowledge of forensic science that is needed to conduct accurate trials. Lastly, possible solutions to improve the communication between forensic science and the actors involved in the criminal justice system. Juries, lawyers and judges should be more educated in understanding forensic science.

Nearly anyone you ask would be familiar with the television show CSI. The crime lab is colorful and high-tech with all of the fun toys and machines that analysts use to test the ever abundant amount of forensic evidence from every crime scene. It makes for an exciting drama that you cannot help but get immersed in—it also gives us a false illusion, however, creating what has been dubbed as the “CSI effect” (Baskin, 2011). This effect describes the idea that crime shows such as CSI generate unreal expectations, making viewers believe that forensic evidence should be existent in all criminal trials, therefore affecting their overall perspective on a case (Baskin, 2011). But in reality, forensic labs are not that glamorous. In fact, the

Today, technology has affected our global surroundings in a number of ways. Technology has created a more advanced society and economy. We use technology in every aspect of life today. New innovations and technology helps create a safer atmosphere and reduces the rate of crime. Technology is the usage and knowledge of techniques or is systems of these things. Usage of technology in the criminal justice system is not new but more apparent today. Technology in criminal justice will continue to challenge us to think about how we turn information into knowledge. Due to new technology, criminal investigations are able to maintain and improve their processes. Forensic science, DNA, other

I believe my argument was compelling, and should sway Board members toward investing in the development of a forensic lab. The biggest difference between corporate investigation and law enforcement investigation is the individual leading the charge. Dedicated forensic specialists can recover evidences across multiple platforms and work within the guidelines of forensic laws to unearth the truth. Public law should provide the blueprint to which organization create company policy. During an investigation, forensic specialist must follow federal, state and city statue; while adhering to company mandate. In closing, presenting facts in a professional manner carries as much weight as the fact-finding

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

The definition of forensic science is any scientific research, method, or theory used to analyze evidence in an attempt to solve legal cases (Cho). In recent years, there has been growing public interest in forensic science, arguably because of the numerous television programs that glamorize its practices. This phenomenon is part of what is known as the CSI effect, or the process through which devoted fans of popular crime dramas develop unrealistic notions of forensic science methods, practices, and their applications in real life cases (Mancini 544; Stevens 37; Ley, Jankowski, and Brewer 52). The CSI effect has had more negative impacts on forensic science and society than positive impacts, especially in regards to what goes on in the

Behind every court case there’s a train of forensic science evidence and research. Forensic science is the application of scientific principles of criminal justice. In many court cases a forensic scientists is the one on the scene collecting finger prints, photos, blood samples and other evidence. Unfortunately one of the controversial issues in the forensic world is the evidence and its lack of verification of its reliability. In the field of forensics there are issues in finding proof in generating conclusion, fundamental knowledge to solve problems, and the whole false memory defense in the court. These issues can be solved in many ways like extensive research, preparation and training. These issues

Forensic science is defined as the practice of utilizing scientific methodologies to clarify judicial inquiries. The field of forensic science contains a broad range of disciplines and has become a vital aspect of criminal investigations. Some forensic disciplines are laboratory-based; while others are based on an analyst’s interpretation of observable patterns (Kourtsounis, 2009). According to the Innocence project’s website; in greater than fifty percent of wrongful convictions, the use of invalidated or improper forensic techniques played a role in cases; which were later

Direct vs. Circumstantial Evidence Evidence comes in many forms, such as eyewitnesses, participants, prior statements by the defendant, documents, physical evidence, and scientific evidence, like fingerprints or DNA. No matter the form, there are two basic kinds of evidence that may be admitted in court, direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence refers to any piece of evidence that stands alone to prove an assertion. In other words, it provides direct proof of a fact and doesn't require any type of inference. The testimony of an eyewitness is the most common form of direct evidence likely to be presented at a criminal trial.

(LawBrain 2010) Basically this set forth guidelines for addressing evidence discovery in a new medium of electronically stored information (SRI). The problem was, before the 14 Sedona Principles, there were no real guidelines for how to approach ESI and present it in court. There were many interpretations with no baseline across States and, not to forget, many lawyers and magistrates while being very fluent in law were not familiar in the emerging presence of ESI and how to handle and/or interpret it. Thanks to the Sedona Conference Working Group and the 14 Sedona principles a baseline for dealing with the ever-growing amount of digital data that is used in court litigation was

Forensic science involves the use of science to solve criminal and civil crimes but mostly lies on the side of criminal investigations. It makes it possible to identify the criminals based on the DNA traces they leave behind. It involves analyses of blood, DNA and other evidences and later on uses the findings as evidence in the court of law. It helps in solving the various crimes in the world and this has been the greatest contributor to the growth of the sector. Cases that were previously considered impossible due to lack of evidenced tracing to the victim can now be solved using forensic science evidences. The essay aims at analyzing the different aspects of forensic science that are used in the process of solving criminal activities. It will also look at the different cases that forensic science was used to solve crimes in a court of law.

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:

Evidence is defined as any matter of fact, the effect, tendency, or design of which is to produce in the mind a persuasion, affirmative or disaffirmative, of the existence of some other matter of fact that a crime has been committed.(Paul B. Watson, 1986) In a legal sense, evidence is the information presented in court during a trial which enables the judge and jury to decide a particular case (Garland & Stuckey, 2000). There are two main types of evidence, which are testimony and physical items which can be presented to the judge and jury during a criminal trial. Physical evidence is any evidence found at the perpetrator’s

Evidence is the key element in determining the guilt or innocence of those accused of crimes against society in a criminal court of law. Evidence can come in the form of weapons, documents, pictures, tape recordings and DNA. According to the American Heritage College dictionary, evidence is the documentary or oral statements and the material objects admissible as testimony in a court of law (476). It is shown in court as an item of proof, to impeach or rehabilitate a witness, and to determine a sentence. This paper will examine two murder cases, O.J. Simpson and Daniel Taylor.