Section 133 Of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872Is The Only

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.

Now a day’s evidence can change a person’s life in the blink of an eye. “People were often punished for crimes based on the word of one or two individuals, with little concern given to sorting out the truth of the affair” (Hunter 12). But today a person must be tried and some physical evidence is needed in order for a person to be convicted of a crime.

The court had reason that these facts, taken together, constitute evidence of presence at the scene, participation in a show of force, association, during the attack, and flight. This evidence also supports the inference that the Mace was sprayed to incapacitate Mr. Tucker, so as to allow Mr. Anderson and the others to leave the crime scene without restraint or further identification of the attacker or his vehicle. This evidence is fully sufficient to support the jury 's finding that Mr. Kobel was an accomplice in acting with Mr. Anderson with a common intent and purpose. As an accomplice, Mr. Kobel is guilty to the same extent that Mr. Anderson is guilty.

e Report, for Resource Utilisation, Witness Accuracy and Psychological Methods for Detection and Successful Prosecution.

Circumstantial evidence is probably one of the biggest ethical concerns when people are being convicted of crimes. Circumstantial evidence is: “Evidence not bearing directly on the fact in dispute but on various attendant circumstances from which the judge or jury might infer the occurrence of the fact in dispute”. (Dictionay.com, 2010). Many

Forensic evidence has been shown to be reliable due to many factors of evidence such as DNA, blood, fingerprints, etc.; however, many cases have shown that

There are specific ethical considerations that need to be addressed when investigating Homicide and rape. A few of these ethical considerations are shared between the two such as the investigators mind state. This plays an important role in the preparations required for a successful prosecution. The investigator must be open-minded to any and all possibilities and be un-bias. The investigator must also know how to conduct all the elements of an investigation in the proper manner from a professional and legal aspect.

The importance of witness testimony is invaluable to any case, but how the testimonies are obtained is integral to assuring that the information given is indeed factual. In the case of

The purpose of this full advice on evidence is to defend client William Hague. The client is on trial for murder under section 302 of the Queensland Criminal Code (henceforth known as QCC). Under section 305 of the QCC the client may be facing life in prison. Queensland’s Supreme Court trial division shall hear the potential case. Persuasive burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove that, beyond a reasonable doubt, the client committed the murder. ‘Beyond a reasonable doubt’ may not be directed, defined or elaborated to the jury. The client possesses an evidential burden to raise any defences beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

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;

I. Introduction R v Kumar debates whether incriminating statements made by a person while in custody to undercover police officers is an improper obtaining of evidence and hence is inadmissible at trial. II. Facts Mr Kumar and Mr Permal were found guilty at trial for murdering Mr Prasad during the early hours of 31 January, by burning him alive after soaking him in petrol. Mr Prasad was reported missing when he withdrew $30,000 from his bank account and failed to come home. During this withdrawal of money, cell phone evidence displayed that Mr Prasad was on a phone-call with Mr Kumar and then sent a text to Mr Kumar stating “she getting money nw”.

In the discussion which follows, the function served by ‘evidence’ within the adversarial system will be considered. The central importance of relevance to the admissibility of evidence will be linked to the purpose served by the tribunal of fact. The range of factors which impact on the criminal justice system will act as a basis to consider the justification for the exclusion of certain evidential material. Developments in attitudes as a result of recent legislation will lead the discussion to the conclusion that the above statement is not sustainable

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.

Following such protocol could help in cases where classifying a person’s guilt is based on fact finding by way of fair and honest legal procedures instead of presenting facts alone. Because the rights listed in the Constitution are not simple, accountability and liability must be present for criminal justice officials and authorities. Equality and uniformity should have a place in the justice process.