Federal Rule 702: Testimony

Detective Mark Fuhrman testified for the prosecution side that he was the first detective at the crime scene and he was the one to find the bloody glove. He testified at a preliminary hearing that he climbed the wall of O.J.'s estate and found a bloody glove on a path. Authorities stated the dark right - handed leather glove was the mate of the other glove found near the murder scene.

I feel that this case was somewhat representative of what was discussed in the textbook. The forensics aspects of this case were generally different from the impression of forensics I received from reading the textbook. Despite this fact, I feel that the investigative techniques of this case were similar to what was discussed in the textbook, as well as what has been discussed during lecture.

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

There is indeed a crisis to a certain extent in the use of forensic science in the prosecution of individuals in criminal cases; this is because some judges and juries over value the objectivity of forensics, without evaluating the timeline and crime scene as a whole. This was particularly evident in the 1995 case of Mallard. In this case Andrew Mallard was convicted for the 1994 murder of Mrs Laurence, a jewellery shop owner in Perth. Mallard is now considered innocent of the murder; however this innocence was only obtained through two appeals. In the second appeal of Mallards, forensic evidence was put forward, but it is alleged that it had not been properly disclosed to the legal team of Mr Mallard when the trial commenced. Thus one of the

In this position paper I have chosen Bloodsworth v. State ~ 76 Md.App. 23, 543 A.2d 382 case to discuss on whether or not the forensic evidence that was submitted for this case should have been admissible or not. To understand whether or not the evidence should be admissible or not we first have to know what the case is about.

Afterward, the defendant council is allowed to cross-examine the witnesses. In the movie, Vinny cross-examines each witness and successfully refutes their eyewitness accounts. The prosecution's last witness is a forensic automotive instructor with the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Vinny objects to this witness because there was no advance notice and he asks for a full day's continuance, but his objection and continuance are overruled. Vinny has no rebuttal for this witness because he has had no time to gather evidence or interpret the reports. Instead, he brings in his own expert witness, Mona Lisa Vito, a former mechanic who proves that there was a second car at the crime scene. The prosecutor asks for a "voir dire," which refers to questioning witnesses about their qualifications. Vinny's final witness, the sheriff, has discovered two men similar to Bill and Stan that drove a similar car and committed the crime. Because of this, the prosecutor asks the judge to dismiss the

They used fingerprint powder to find out who was driving the car. There were fingerprints found in the car.

Thornton vs US clearly establishes that vehicles are exceptional due to being mobile and the fact that evidence of a crime in the vehicle is at risk of being lost or destroyed. Officers should therefore have more power to collect and protect evidence of criminal activity from a vehicle.

1. The witness has first had an opportunity to explain or deny it and counsel for the other parties have had an opportunity to ask about it, and

During this trial there were three invalid forensic sciences used in the trial (National Registry).  The investigators of this event found soil, hair, and imprints from Barnes truck that were somehow related and similar to Simon (Drahl). Pagliaro, a lady conducting evidence from the scene, had told the jury that she found the fabric from Simon's jeans matched an imprint on Barnes' truck.  She also said that there were two hairs in Barnes's truck that were more microscopically similar to the victims than to Barnes (National Registry). This evidence could lead to bad things for Barnes because it looks like Barnes is now more closely related to the

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

Mr. Adamson’s statements and admissions demonstrate that driver error or mechanical failure of the vehicle was a plausible cause of the accident and not the tire failure. Driver error or mechanical failure is at least an equally plausible explanation for the actions of Mr. Quinones in driving his vehicle at the time of the accident.

The next piece of evidence is a physical piece of evidence. It was collected by a photograph. The evidence was black tire marks. This evidence is relevant to the case because the marks are from Max’s car.

A segment of the Forensic Science in the Criminal equity organization that the vast majority acquainted with these days, however, few individuals know how this particular science came to be. Overall, legal science is intended to utilize experimental standards to clarify obscure parts of a wrongdoing. Through the utilization of uncommon tests and lab gear that permits researchers to recognize decisively different parts of a bit of confirmation in an illegal behavior. On the off chance that you occupied with finding out about how this procedure came to fruition, you have to peruse the recorded data underneath. Here is a brief history

The book gives a general overview of the field of forensic science. The sections of the book include “The Scene of the Crime; Working the Scene--The Evidence; Working the Scene of the Body Human;