Why Forensics Is Not A Perfect Science?

1619 Words7 Pages
It is indisputable that the advancement in technology and knowledge has greatly improved the capability to catch criminals. Forensics of the past did not include the tools or knowledge that we now have. Although forensics is not a perfect science nor has it ever been, we are closer to perfecting it than ever. Every criminal leaves behind some traces of evidence; it is up to the professionals to find and analyze it to solve cases. Looking at the timeline of forensics technology of the past to the present it is evident that it has evolved dramatically and will continue to do so. The beginnings of forensics science were very basic, but a huge leap forward for that generation. One of the earliest known forensic scientists was a Roman lawyer named Quintilian; around 1000, [A.D.] he was able to prove a man’s innocence by a bloody handprint, which was found at the scene. Was it simple knowledge? Yes, however, this lead to further improvements as time progressed. Yet another account of early forensics was the first book named “Xi Yuan Lu” (Washing Away of Wrongs) written Song Ci. (Scott) “The author describes a local peasant who was stabbed to death in his village in approximately 1235 A.D. According to Song Ci’s account, investigators determined that a handle sickle must have caused the fatal wound. All villagers who possessed sickles were assembled in the town square and told to place their harvesting tools on the ground and to stand behind them. Within minutes, shiny, metallic
Open Document