Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
An essay on forensic science
An essay on forensic science
An essay on forensic science
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the passage “Forensic Science: Evidence, Clues, and Investigation” by Andrea Campbell, the author explains the various types of evidence that is in various court cases. In all, there have four different types of evidence presented at a trial. The author explains why forensic, or hard evidence is better than the other types. In fact, this type of evidence is referred to hard evidence because it is physical evidence. This includes pieces like blood, hair, fingerprints, guns, ex. However, forensic evidence is only wrong if a person interprets it wrong. Forensic evidence offers all of the scientific evidence needed in a court case. Forensic evidence is the type of evidence used in drastic cases such as violent crimes excluding cases, like
minor crimes and accidents. Obviously, forensic evidence is the best type of evidence that can be used because it is much more accurate than the others. It is the best to use because, after all, forensic evidence can give someone a specific time and place of a crime. The information explains who was involved and why. Clearly, without this type of evidence, many questions about a case would remain unanswered. It can can reconstruct the crime by giving a piece by piece description of the crime. This type of evidence answers the questions with the truth if it is interpreted correctly. As a final point, forensic evidence is the most trustable choice of evidence. Compared to the different types, it is more accurate. It is applied mostly in serious crimes, like murder or any other major violent crimes. As stated in paragraph seven, forensic evidence is “the glue that holds all the facts together.” The biggest part about forensic evidence is that the system eliminates the innocent suspects from going to jail.
Other evidence located within the grave consisted of a generic watch, two cigarette butts, a button, a washer and a shell casing. All of these could be analysed for finger prints and DNA. The cigarette butts would also show a serial number indicating the brand (shown in Figure 3), which can be useful if it is found a victim or offender smokes a particular type of cigarette.
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.
Judges make rulings on what evidence may or may not be admitted over the course of a trial and technology impacts the way police collect and process evidence, this is true today as well as during the 1892 trial of Lizzie Borden. The rudimentary practice of evidence collection and processing by police was a critical factor in the acquittal of Lizzie Borden. Fingerprinting had not been introduced into the court system and the absence of an eyewitness left the prosecution with little to work with, this left the prosecution only circumstantial evidence but most if not all of it pointed at the defendant. The Borden home was absent of any signs of forced entry and the traditional signs of a struggle couldn’t be located during the police examination but several gruesome facts indicated Lizzie Borden may have been innocent. Medical evidence as to the method used in the killings pointed toward a “tall man” being the culprit, specifically the nineteen wounds inflicted on Abby Borden were said to have been from a dull edge of an axe.
Therefore, the criminal justice system relies on other nonscientific means that are not accepted or clear. Many of forensic methods have implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or anything to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011). Defense experts are required to help the defense attorneys defend and breakdown all of the doubts in the prosecutors scientific findings in criminal cases. Scientific information is integral in a criminal prosecution, and a defense attorney needs to have an expert to assist he/she in discrediting the prosecution (Giannelli,
In recent years, however, such programs as CSI that follows detectives at the Las Vegas Police Department Crime Scene Investigations Bureau as they solve puzzles and catch criminals. Perhaps one of the most well known shows with a forensic psychology theme, CSI has a large impact on viewers perceptions of forensic psychology. On one hand, the increased popularity of forensic psychology because of the show is good and more people are taking an interest in forensic psychology as a career. On the other hand, the forensic psychology that viewers see every week on television may not be exactly the same as forensic psychology in reality. Particularly programs such as CSI also overstate the ability of “hard” evidence (also known as forensic evidence), such as fingerprints and DNA, to provide evidence of definite innocence or guilt (Trask, 2007). They often disregard other components of the investigative process, such as police questioning, despite these being equally valid to establishing guilt (Nolan, 2006). This over-reliance on forensic evidence, due to the importance of forensic science being dramatized by television crime dramas, is also known as the CSI
The Trace Evidence Unit is known to examine the largest variety of evidence types and uses the biggest range of analytical methods of any unit. materials are compared with standards or known samples to determine whether or not they share any common characteristics. In this paper I will discuss the different kinds of trace evidence and how crime scene investigators use it to solve cases and convict criminals. Trace evidence was first discovered by Edmond Locard. Edmond Locard was born in 1877, and founded the Lyon’s Institute of Criminalistics.
Forensic Science, recognized as Forensics, is the solicitation of science to law to understand evidences for crime investigation. Forensic scientists are investigators that collect evidences at the crime scene and analyse it uses technology to reveal scientific evidence in a range of fields. Physical evidence are included things that can be seen, whether with the naked eye or through the use of magnification or other analytical tools. Some of this evidence is categorized as impression evidence2.In this report I’ll determine the areas of forensic science that are relevant to particular investigation and setting out in what method the forensic science procedures I have recognized that would be useful for the particular crime scene.
CSIs must photograph/sketch crime scenes, take measurements, make observations, testify against criminals in court, and collect, pack, label, document, and analyze evidence (Career Cruising). All of these tasks CSIs must complete, require them to handle a variety of tools including: cameras, tripods, flashlights, notepads, utensils to collect physical evidence, measuring tapes, rulers, microscopes, fingerprinting kits, and even guns in some cases (Career Cruising). CSI agents collect to different types of evidence, when they investigate a crime (Byrd). The first type of evidence is testimonial evidence, which is the answers CSIs questioning suspects and witnesses are given (Byrd). Physical evidence, which is the other type of evidence, is any type of three-dimensional evidence collected at a crime scene (Byrd). Although different CSI teams from different areas of the world can consist of multiple branches, including: detectives, technicians, medical examiners, scientists, and lab analysts, they still use forensics, which is science and technology, to investigate crimes (Zullo). There is always crime, but when there are no current cases; CSIs go back to old/previous cases (McFadden).
The transitional growth in the forensic science sector has not been without challenges. Though the world has experienced increased capabilities and scientific knowledge, which has led to faster investigations and results, many forensic experts have argued that forensic laboratory testing, in the light of 21st century technological advancements, is yet to meet the expected rate in quick available testing and analysis (Mennell & Shaw, 2006). This is with respect to the growing rate of crime and the high demand of quick crime scene testing and analysis. In the science of crime scene, analysis and interpretation of evidence is majorly dependent on forensic science, highlighting the change in the role of forensic sciences (Tjin-A-Tsoi, 2013). In the business of forensic science, time is beginning to play important role in the evidence testing and analysis which is becoming crucial in reducing ...
Whereas the real picture of forensic evidence is unlike what is represented in movies and television shows where a fingerprint or a trace of hair is found, then it’s game over for the criminal. Reality is not as straightforward. As more people are exposed to the unreal forensic world through television and media the likeliness for a wrong conviction increases with juries assuming the evidence involves more science than what it really does, this is known as the CSI Effect. Further education and training is needed for the people of the court, the forensic specialists, and so called experts. The people in courts do not question any of the ‘professionals’ and just trust in their expertise. The court could overcome this perception by requiring explanation of error rates in a forensic field. To do this, testing examiner error rates will be necessary which means further research. Forensic science has such a large effect on the prosecution of suspects, experts have been known to provide questionable and at times incorrect evidence. When a false conviction occurs the true perpetrator is set free. Once realized, the public doubts the justice system and the reliability of the forensic evidence even more. At this point in time, forensic is an inexact
The amount of evidence can either help win or lose a case. Every crime scene has evidence available for officers to collect. It is important for them to know what the standard protocol is for collecting evidence and how to properly collect it without contamination.
As far back as 1832, James Marsh was the first to use forensics at trial to give evidence as a chemist in 1832. Since that time forensic science and evidence has come a long way in various ways and technology to help in determine if the suspect is guilt or not, through such things as DNA testing, blood, and fingerprints. The first forensic police crime lab was created in 1910. The contributions of Dr. Edmond Locard, a French scientist and criminologist, proposed that “everything leaves a trace”. This principle is still valid today as it was so many years ago. No matter how small, the specialized trained technicians and investigators can take these methods and go to a crime scene to get evidence. “Forensic science is the application of sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, computer science and engineering to matters of law.” (Office of Justice, 2017) These different sciences can help achieve and assist in solving a case. Forensic science has also the ability to prove that a crime was committed, it can find the elements of the crime, it can help place the suspect at the scene and whether the suspect had any contact with the victim. However, in the last several years the techniques and with the use of technology the evidence that forensic science uncovers can also exonerate an innocent individual who has been falsely accused of the
“The word ‘forensics’ means “connected with the courtroom”; so forensic science is, therefore, concerned with gathering hard evidence that can be presented in a trial” (Innes 9). Forensic science is a science that is applied specifically to legal matters, whether criminal or civil. “Few areas in the realm of science are as widespread and important as forensic science” (Hunter 12). Forensics is the one science that is most commonly used in everyday life. It is also a branch of science that incorporates other branches of science such as biology, chemistry, and etc. Since it is used almost every day “No one can dispute the importance of the contributions to society made by forensic science; the ability to solve crime is undeniably important” (Hunter 13). Forensic science has given criminal investigation a new edge. “Advances in science have opened the door for more effective evidence discovery, howev...
Forensic science is a particularly large field of work to be a part of. There are many important parts to it that are all very different. In short, forensic science deals with applying scientific knowledge to legal and criminal situations. As mentioned earlier, forensic sciences is an extremely large field of work. There are forensic engineers, forensic geneticists, linguists, phoneticians. All of which, work together to uncover crimes by using science. In any given case forensic scientists may be looking at certain photographs, DNA traces, weapons and tools, and also certain documents.
The process of gathering evidence largely depends on the role of discretion by the police. Once police have decided to pursue a reported crime, they then begin the process of gathering evidence. To ensure that the process of gathering evidence is lawful, the police must follow the procedure outlined in the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), which describes the manner in which evidence can be collected. This act imposes certain limits on the way police can gather evidence and the types of evidence that can be used. The Act is able to protect the rights of citizens by making it a requirement for the police to gain necessary legal documentation, such as search warrants, in order to obtain some types of evidence and thus, protects the rights of ordinary systems. In more recent times, the use of technology has come to play a major role in the gathering of evidence and with this comes complications in the law. New technologies in relation to the criminal investigation process are mainly in reference to DNA evidence, genetic material that can place a suspect at the scene of a crime. The introduction of DNA evidence into the criminal investigation process has been extremely effective in achieving justice, as it is able to secure convictions. Initially, there were some setbacks to the use of DNA evidence