Forensic Science And The Criminal Cases

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.

7) Pollen & Spore identification can provide important trace evidence in solving crimes dues to their

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.

Forensic evidence plays a huge role in most criminal cases. After the Daubert trial, forensic scientific evidence was reevaluated in criminal and civil cases. Scientific and forensic types of evidence can be extremely helpful in proving the case. It can help identify the suspect in a criminal case. That will help put a criminal in prison. There are many different types of forensic evidence that can be considered as scientific evidence. The different types include DNA matching, fingerprint identification, and hair evidence. The methods used to show these types of evidence are usually beyond the scope of knowledge that judges and juries know. Those types of forensic evidence are usually introduced as scientific evidence. Scientific evidence can sometimes be omitted from a courtroom or

The idea of using the science has been started before the debuting of Sherlock Holmes in 1887, who had introduced about the forensic science to help criminal investigation. In history, the work of forensic scientists was performed by medical personnel. Until the end of eighteenth century, the attempts of French medical jurist Antoine Louis, crime solving Chinese book “ Hsi Duan Yu”(the washing way of wrongs), etc gave ideas about determining time of death, analyzing blood stain, identifying chemical used in crime, etc. After eighteenth century, the modern chemistry paved new way of identifying crime like the idea of measuring height, length of right ear and outstretched

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

This information will help investigators cluster the symptoms with a particular disease and rule out irrelevant information. The surveillance of the components gather in this step will put a perspective on the abnormal health events that are occurring on the outbreak timeline.

    A review of false convictions that involved forensic science and can help identify critical lessons for forensic scientists as they perform testing, interpret results, render conclusions, and testify in court from the national institute of justice.

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

between a cut (an injury that is longer than deep) and a stab wound (an injury

All forensic scientists are obligated to tell the truth and are not misleading the jury, but there is no single ethical code that applies to all disciplines, but there are two organizations that develop ethical codes for forensic testimony and presentation in the U.S, The American Board of Criminalistics(ABC) and The American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS). The ABC code requires each certified member to ¨ensure that the opinions rendered with regard to their analyses are done so only to the extent to be justified by evidence¨ and insure that the testimony is presented clearly (24). The AFFS code states that members can not ¨materially misinterpret data or scientific principles¨ upon which their professional opinion or conclusion is made (24). It states that forensic scientists are not adversaries and should make every effort to uphold the oath of truth. In 2009 there was a study by Brandon L. Garrett and Peter J. Neufeld that explored the ¨the relationship between forensic testimony and convictions ultimately leading to exonerations based upon

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

Forensic science is a broad term that refers to the use of science or technology in a court room environment. Forensic science plays an important role in modern popular culture; the police procedural is highly dependent upon cutting-edge forensic science. Moreover, many people are aware of the impact of DNA testing on the modern criminal justice landscape. However, forensic science actually predates many modern scientific advances; almost as long as there have been controversies, there has been some type of forensic science.

Forensic science borrows from a number of sciences which include: physics, Biology and chemistry. It therefore involves examination of a wide spectrum as compared to any other method of investigation. Due to the wide spectrum of investigation and evidence analysis the method offers; it ensures that the results are accurate and can be used in the court of law to make a decision. The method establishes the existence of a crime, the connection between the crimes and the

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: