After watching the video presentation of the forensic speech, it was very disappointed because I had used a lot of resources with enough information to be able to fully explain my forensic research. However, watching the speech prove to me that no matter how good your resources are if it I can’t accurately deliver it would not be understood. Thougout the recording I’ve notice a lot if fuller word I was using when I was nervous, and not so much eye contact.
Upon the next speech I would focus on improving the trouble I had explaining things. In other words, I have trouble gathering my taught when I’m in front of the class even if I practice right before class when its my turn its like my mind goes blink on me. Often I stumble on my wording and
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.
CBS’s CSI: Crime Scene Investigation exploded into popularity when it aired in 2000, opening doors for the creation of other similar criminal investigative television shows involving forensic evidence such as Cold Case, Criminal Minds, and Bones. Many of these CSI-type shows present a murder or crime solved within an hour-long episode using forensic evidence conceived by glamorized CSI personnel and sometimes fabricated methodologies and technologies that only exist on television. Despite just being shows, one wonders whether these popular shows have skewered public perceptions about forensic evidence in real court cases and have impacted the outcome of court verdicts. The CSI Effect, explained by Kim, et all, was named after the television show
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 minds of jurors who frequently watch television programs about crime. Studying the CSI effect also leads to tough questions about the ethics of portraying real stories to entertain the audience. The use of these true stories is justified in certain contexts, such as instances when societal issues arise, and as long as there is respect toward the privacy of family members and friends involved in such tragedies. The solution to the negative consequences of the CSI effect could be to produce television programs that are somehow informative and entertaining, but this would make it difficult to hold the interest of a viewing audience that craves drama and action.
One of my greatest strengths pertaining to education is my ability to complete my work in a timely matter. I only turned in late work at least two times in my high school career. Another strength I possess is being a respectful, erudite student. I can understand the lessons quickly and listen to my teacher in a considerate manner. Although one can discuss their strengths indefinitely, weaknesses must be told to understand a person. One of my main shortcomings is public speaking. I find it hard to present myself in front of a large group of people. Once I begin to know my peers, it is easier for me to speak in front of them during
The criminal justice system has changed a lot since the good old days of the Wild West when pretty much anything was legal. Criminals were dealt with in any fashion the law enforcement saw fit. The science of catching criminals has evolved since these days. We are better at catching criminals than ever and we owe this advancement to forensic science. The development of forensic science has given us the important techniques of fingerprinting and DNA analysis. We can use these techniques to catch criminals, prove people's innocence, and keep track of inmates after they have been paroled. There are many different ways of solving crimes using forensic evidence. One of these ways is using blood spatter analysis; this is where the distribution and pattern of bloodstains is studied to find the nature of the event that caused the blood spatter. Many things go into the determination of the cause including: the effects of various types of physical forces on blood, the interaction between blood and the surfaces on which it falls, the location of the person shedding the blood, the location and actions of the assailant, and the movement of them both during the incident. Another common type of forensic evidence is trace evidence. This is commonly recovered from any number of items at a crime scene. These items can include carpet fibers, clothing fibers, or hair found in or around the crime scene. Hairs recovered from crime scenes can be used as an important source of DNA. Examination of material recovered from a victim's or suspect's clothing can allow association to be made between the victim and other people, places, or things involved in the investigation. DNA analysis is the most important part of forensic science. DNA evidence can come in many forms at the crime scene. Some of these forms include hair; bodily fluids recovered at the crime scene or on the victim's body, skin under the victim's fingernails, blood, and many others. This DNA can be the basis of someone's guilt or innocence; it has decided many cases in the twentieth century. As the times continue to change and the criminals get smarter we will always need to find new ways to catch them. Forensic science is the most advanced method yet, but is only the beginning. As the field of science grows so will the abilities of the
During my demonstration speech, I was affected by my speech anxiety. Some of the viewable symptoms were the shaking of my hands and also the stuttering of speech. I was able to control myself and relax after I started getting into my information. I did use some of the suggested relaxation techniques to relieve my anxiety. Before I got up to speak I thought confident of myself to help give me courage and confidence.
The primary goal of a Forensic Interview is to gather evidence and find the truthful facts about case. When interviewing children, having thorough knowledge of child development can help facilitate a better more forensically defensible interview because children do not yet have the ability to think, comprehend and express language and recall events in the same way that adults do. Having knowledge of a child’s developmental level can allow the interviewer to gather the information from the child by asking questions and using language that is developmentally appropriate and based on the child’s age and cognition level.
Nearly anyone you ask would be familiar with the television show CSI. The crime lab is colorful and high-tech with all of the fun toys and machines that analysts use to test the ever abundant amount of forensic evidence from every crime scene. It makes for an exciting drama that you cannot help but get immersed in—it also gives us a false illusion, however, creating what has been dubbed as the “CSI effect” (Baskin, 2011). This effect describes the idea that crime shows such as CSI generate unreal expectations, making viewers believe that forensic evidence should be existent in all criminal trials, therefore affecting their overall perspective on a case (Baskin, 2011). But in reality, forensic labs are not that glamorous. In fact, the actual amount of forensic evidence collected from a crime scene is small, and sometimes this evidence is not even very influential to a case for various reasons.
...e knowledgeable information about a client in helping to determine things such as competency to stand trial, being tried as an adult, credibility for testimony, etc. Therefore, obtaining the best information possible whether it is through the individual in instruments or from third party resources, the most should be done to collect what is needed for a successful testimony. There are certain factors that forensic psychologists and the courts must consider in order to make the best possible decision for the case. It is the important elements of the case, following ethical codes, and a respect for the forensic assessment principles that will lead to a precise, confident, meticulous, competent and undoubted testimony. I am glad Brenton Butler was found innocent. It shows that good arguments and valid scientific evidence always beats unethical and incompetent work.
I also did not have enough information. I was nervous, so I sped up my speech. I knew this would probably happened so I should have planned for it by making my speech longer. I also should have asked more questions during the interview and I should have expanded on more of the questions that I asked. I also discovered that I needed to find a different way to end my speech. A way that would leave a lasting impression. Another thing I realized is that I had way too many words on my notecard. The notecard I was using had too much of the speech and I kept getting losing my spot in the speech. I also stayed up way to late the night before the speech. This means I was really tired when giving the speech, which made it harder to remember
Collecting evidence from a crime scene is a crucial aspect of solving crimes. Before evidence can be seized, there must first be a court order approving the search of the crime scene and the seizure of the evidence found at the scene. Standard protocol for officers is for them to always use latex gloves, avoid plastic bags, double wrap small objects, package each object separately, and to collect as much evidence as possible. It is better to have too much evidence than to not have enough. There are countless amounts of evidence that can be found at a crime scene.
High profile cases, flawless police work, and only the most up to date technology, these traits every reality crime show such as CSI or Criminal Minds portray. While it is no surprise that this type of television show is among the most popular, the viewers are beginning to develop a skewed perspective of forensics in the real world. This new mindset is changing more than just the way people perceive science. The misunderstanding of science and technology has begun to lead to issues in the courtroom in real criminal trials. Jurors influenced by the appearance of perfect investigative science are demanding extensive testing that is unnecessary and extremely costly. Reality crime shows heighten juror expectations and force law enforcement officers
The interaction between psychology and laws is based on the common focus of evaluating and understanding human behavior. Since psychologists are involved in assessing human behavior, they are called upon in certain legal cases to provide insights that may help the court to issue a sound ruling. Nevertheless, there are significant differences between psychologist working in clinical traditional settings and those conducting a forensic evaluation of the court. Psychologists may be asked to conduct both clinical and forensic assessment, and it is essential to understand the differences between the two. While clinical psychology deals with assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of human behavior and functioning,
In the beginning of the semester when we were handed this trial without knowing this was the one we would be viewing in class, I noticed that my initial verdict from then was drastically different than my final verdict after watching the trial. After viewing the trial I realized that the details and evidence that was presented in the article we were given was one sided to favor the prosecutors. I believe that it is important for me to discuss my view of this trial, my verdict and my reasoning for why I believe in my decision.