Forensic scientists must swear to tell the truth and not distort the facts in the form of a testimony. Distortions of fact may include deliberately omitting important facts, encouraging misinterpretations or false conclusions. Scientists can even lie about their credentials to make themselves appear qualified enough to testify. General acceptance criterion for scientists is not necessarily reliable because they are not widely accepted methods in court. To be scientific according to the court means to present the idea of correct science methods. The court judges an expert witness’s testimony by assessing the scientific reliability of the methods the expert used to read their conclusions. Forensic scientists must value the moral virtue of telling the truth as well as the scientific virtue of reliable science. In order to tell the truth in court a scientist must be both a good scientist and a good person. There are no laws to define the legal and ethical responsibilities of forensic scientists but they do use codes of conducts from professional organizations. Professional ethics is an important element of doing science and is not just a list of right and wrong. Scientists also have legal duties to the court, professional obligations to their employer, client, or code of conduct, as well as personal responsibilities to themselves and to their science. Skepticism of legal, moral, ethical, and scientific values occurs in the courtroom when institutions are unregulated or self-regulated. The FBI requires examination of these values at forensic science institutions to resolve these conflicts. Any conflicts with these values are spread around by the press and media which cause even more distrust in the legal system.
Forensic science is th...
... middle of paper ...
...nty that have gotten away with it. Ethics is a very important part of forensic science, but a lack of it has been found in all disciplines involved with forensic science due to a lack of or improper training and personal morals. Some other reasons as to why people may be driven to do these unethical acts include greed to gain power and a higher status, forgetting to be unbiased, and not wanting to let their team down. These acts can be easily prevented through background checks, proper training, and good management of forensic scientists.
The actions and observations of investigators and criminalists will most likely be presented during a court case so their reputations depend on how ethically and accurately they did their job. Forensic science specialists must recreate the crime scene to the court with their testimony and speak the truth for the voiceless victim.
Since the airing of the CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and the other televised series that followed have led jurors to compare fiction with reality. The shows have changed the view on the real world of forensic science as the series have a world of forensic science of their own. For this paper the televised series titled Bones by forensic anthropologist Kathy Reichs will be used as an example for comparison. In the series Bones Dr. Temperance Brenan arrives at the scene of the crime to examine the skeletal remains found in the scene of the crime equipped with one or more forensic kits. Upon momentarily examining the skeletal remains Dr. Brenan is able to determine the gender, ethnicity, and age. When this type of scenario is compared to nonfictional
Forensic Science Introduction: Someone in a restaurant has suddenly fallen ill and a mystery powder has been discovered with the victim. As the chief investigator, your duty is to identify the mystery substance through a lab. In this lab, it will consist of five known compounds and one unknown compound. Your job is to distinguish which one out of the five substances is the mystery powder. To figure out the mystery matter you will have to compare their physical and chemical properties and match them with the appropriate compound.
Jurors have unrealistic ideas of evidence processing. ”Such programs give the impression that forensic laboratories are fully staffed with highly trained personnel, stocked with a full complement of state-of-the-art instrumentation and rolling in the resources to close every case in a timely fashion.” (Houck 85) Forensic laboratories face funding deficits, not enough suitably trained staff and the consistent advancement of technology. University of Maryland forensic scientist Thomas Mauriello estimates that about 40 percent of the forensic science shown on CSI does not exist. Carol Henderson, director of the National Clearinghouse for Science, Technology and the Law at Stetson University College of Law, told a publication of that institution that jurors are “sometimes disappointed if some of the new technologies that they think exist are not used.” (Houck 87) Investigators often have to explain to victims that it is not possible to collect a sample of...
At least 99 percent of the time, forensic science is reliable and deem accurate. Although four experts that matched Brandon Mayfield’s fingerprint to the fingerprint on a bag at the crime scene, they in fact misidentified the evidence and Spanish police found out that the latent fingerprint actually belong to be an Algerian. This shown that forensic experts and attorneys can definitely be wrong; furthermore, it convey that not all evidence presented in the case is subjected to be infallible and there is a possibility for committed error. Leah Bartos, a UC Berkley graduate student with a Journalism degree, conducted an experiment to understand the process of becoming a certified forensic consultant. She had no prior knowledge in the forensic discipline, but became certified after she passed the open book exam and sent ACFET her bachelor degree, resume, and references. The ACFET exam have a 99 percent pass rate; therefore, it is criticized for creditability of its certified graduate and branded a diploma milling organization for-profit. Attorney can argue the weakness of the forensic evidence presented, hence forensic science call for bad science and can definitely be misuse in our adversarial legal
I began this year considering a career in forensics. After delving into the field in detail however, I see that it is a very delicate science and easily open to misinterpretation. There are many variables within forensics, the first and foremost being that of the CSI effect and how it influences our expectations of the capabilities of forensic science. While it's true that great advances have been made in the area of forensic science, it's unrealistic to expect a crime scene to be processed, evidence analyzed and a conclusive forensics report to be completed in a short time and be completely accurate 100% of the time. Forensic science has a lot of room for improvement, and understanding if, how, and why shows like CSI affect the field is of high priority. After all, this is real life and not a TV show.
Forensic anthropology is the study of bones in relation to a criminal investigation. Some have probably seen it used on television, but this is not an accurate portrayal of what this truly is. Many times, this area of forensic science is hidden from the public eye; people only get to see all of the glamorous parts. What they do not see is all of the hard work and effort that is put in to get the job correctly done. This career is a rare decision for someone to choose, because of the lack of opportunity for employment positions as well as the low income per year; however, it is an extremely fascinating occupation. Forensic anthropology has been known to help many organizations, including museums, and law enforcement agencies.
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,
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
Each laboratory has its own standard and guidelines rather than having uniformity across the industry. This allows one forensic labs results to be different to another’s based on their own individual practices. The standards and guidelines for the checking of forensic laboratories varies from state to state and the inspection is peer assessed. This is a problem as the auditing of the labs may be subject to bias rather than using an independent authority. Lab test guidelines might not result in all evidence having to be reported. For example, the Waring case in Western Australia, where a young man was charged with rape because the lab failed to report that more than Waring’s DNA was found in the victim’s rape kit. According to this lab’s approved guidelines – low levels of DNA below a certain point found, do not have to be reported (7). The issue of what standard was being used was not evident in this case. If the guidelines had required the forensic scientist to reveal even the very low samples of a second male’s DNA, the jury may not have convicted an innocent person (8). When the professionals get it wrong, and they do, their authority and their power alters the lives of innocent people. Pressure can be placed on forensic scientists and technicians. So when something doesn’t fit with what has been predicted, it has been known that tampering of evidence can occur. Forensic science requires
Crime Scene Investigation For my assignment, I will be looking into the case of James Bulger, aged 2 years old, who was kidnapped and murdered by John Venables and Robert Thompson on February 12th 1993. Through evidence found at the crime scene and testimonial statements, the police saw that the two boys, ages 11, abducted James from Bootle Strand Shopping Center, Liverpool. They took him on a long, aimless walk where they brutally attacked him and left him for dead. In my assignment I will show how work done by the police, forensic scientists and Investigators helped to convict Jon and Robert.
Forensics Anthropology is the study that goes beyond the human skeleton. A forensics anthropologist can find out. How a person lived, the food that person ate, and the overall make-up of a human. The use of forensics has grown in recent years, it is used to solve crimes and locate missing persons. Snow, (1982) Forensics anthropology is not a new science. The first case forensics anthropology was used on was the Jezebel case, dating back to the nineteenth century. This case involved a person, who was thrown from a window. Snow, (1982) The remains found in this case were the skull, feet, and the palm of the victim’s hands.
Forensic scientists work in labs where they examine, identify, and interpret evidence collected in crime scenes. Crime scene investigators collect evidence and pass it to a forensic scientist who uses the items in numerous ways to help catch criminals. Forensic scientists must also record the evidence and any tests ran on it in detail to prove the truth in court. A forensic scientist also has to be able to present his or her physical evidence verbally in court, so a strong communication background is important.
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
Forensic science includes all types of different science such as: physics, chemistry, biology, computer science and engineering to matter of law. A forensic scientist is a specialist in a field of science who applies their knowledge to the purposes of law. The job as a Forensic Scientist not only has many details and facts you have to remember but you also need items of evidence that are relevant in order to examine the scene correctly.
“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...