Incredible Evidence

Standard procedures in the handling of physical evidence is a crucial factor in the criminal trial process. Any deviation from standard operating procedures in the handling of physical evidence can affect the outcome of a trial. Physical evidence is described by the Oxford Reference - A Dictionary of Forensic Science as: any type of tangible evidence as opposed to something such as the testimony of an eyewitness. Physical evidence can be anything that is capable of being perceived by touch. It can be as minute as a piece of dust, or as large as a car. Physical evidence must be preserved, documented, collected, marked, transported, and stored in a way that preserves the integrity of the particular type of evidence. It is subjected to a chain

Known standards must be recognized and followed so that possession is obtained legally, evidence is marked appropriately samples are properly preserved, and the acquisition process is reported accurately. A complete chain of custody must be documented. Missing evidence or gaps in the chain of custody can produce doubt regarding the validity of the evidence. Doubt can lead to a ruling that evidence not be considered in a court of law because it lacks value in the prosecution. A ruling of not guilty, a mistrial or a complete dismissal of the case could ensue based on whether or not key evidence was dismissed from consideration, or how physical evidence is handled. In the case “Incredible Evidence” illustrated in our textbook on pages 68 and 69, a jury issued a verdict of not guilty in the high profile case involving O.J. Simpson, based on how the evidence was handled during the

Prosecution alleged that the delay in discovery would have given police ample time to plant the blood.
• Navy Blue Socks: Blood from both victims matched the stains on the socks.
• Leather Gloves: Prosecution suggested that one of the gloves was transported from the crime scene by police and planted on the walkway.
• Simpson’s Blood Sample: Detective Vannatter did not take the blood samples obtained from Simpson at police headquarters to the evidence department or crime laboratory at police headquarters. Instead, he transported the samples to the crime scene and gave the sample to the crime scene technicians still on scene collecting evidence. The defense maintained that this was not established procedure, and that police planted the defendants blood at the crime scene and various pieces of evidence. The defense maintained that 1.5 milliliters or Simpson’s Blood was unaccounted for by the crime laboratory.
• EDTA: EDTA is a preservative that was found in minute quantities in the blood evidence. The defense contended that finding the preservative was indicative to the blood