Forensic science plays a vital role in the criminal justice system by aiding an investigator’s case with scientific information based on the analysis of the evidence. Each crime scene is unique in its own way and using the evidence collected, forensic experts try to piece it together. An expert is someone who has had enough education, training, and experience to testify to the matter at hand (Harmon 2010). Unlike other witnesses in a case who testify based on first hand knowledge, the expert witness is not required to have firsthand knowledge of a particular case, and in fact, often does not. Rather, the expert witness testifies to the meaning of the facts (Whitcomb et al. 2005). Each forensic expert typically has a background in another scientific discipline, such as biology, physics, chemistry, etc. An expert with a biology background may work with DNA; chemistry may work in toxicology; and physics in blood spatter trajectories. Working separately on their own respected evidence, an investigator is able to collect all their data and set up a case (National Institute of Justice 2013). Usually, these experts will be hired by either the prosecution or defense in a criminal trial, or by a plaintiff or defendant in a civil litigation. The role of the expert witness exists in variants: between criminal and civil courts as well as the prosecution and defense.
Forensic science is specialized in finding proof and evidence to analyze and search for clues. When crimes are done, criminals frequently leave behind evidence at the crime scene. Crime Investigators (AKA- CSIs) and Medical Examiners (MEs) the inspect the evidence left at the crime scene for leads to who did what. They try and rebuild the scene using the evidence and proof that they have. Forensic science has played a great role in finding evidence for crimes in history because it helps find the person who did wrong, the perpetrator, and it helps bring justice to the case. Forensics now are better than before because technological advances like DNA testing has been made, which takes forensics to a whole new level.
The O.J. Simpson trial, as it became known, opened on January 24, 1995 and concluded October 3 the same year. Over the span of the trial, the prosecution team presented 72 witnesses including friends and family of Nicole, friends of O.J., and a 9-1-1 dispatcher. Given the trial’s notable and well-known defendant, those involved in the trial gained lifetime fame. To this day I can still recall the names Judge Lance Ito, Marcia Clark (Deputy District Attorney), and Simpson’s defense counsel, “The Dream Team,” which consisted of a number of high-profile attorneys, most notably Robert Shapiro and Johnnie Cochran. I chose this case because it left a lasting impression in my memory, as well as a lasting impression in our nation’s memory. There have been many high-profile cases over the years, but this case was not predicted to end the way it di...
In the year 2014, law enforcement in the United States estimated 1,165,383 violent crimes reported (“D2014VC”). Imagine the number of people needed get to the bottom of all of those cases! There are an abundant amount of Americans solving mysteries every day to keep others safe. Crimes are committed all around the United States at every second of the day! In John Grisham’s The Pelican Brief, he displays a firm relation between investigators and lawyers through the Criminal Justice System of acquiring suspects and evidence, indicated in the book with an exploration of the scandals of Supreme Court Justices Rosenberg and Jensen (Grisham).
Forensic investigations require skills of specially trained scientists, police, engineers, doctors and others. “These investigators observe all types of evidence, from weapons to bloodstains and from computers to bugs” (Erzinclioglu 5). The greater the evidence against a person, the greater the chance of conviction.
Forensic science is the employment of science to solve crimes. Forensic scientists use evidence from the crime scene to track the criminal down or determine the guilt or innocence of a suspect on trial. Some evidence examples that forensic scientists use for their job include fingerprints, footprints, teeth marks, blood, semen, hair fibers, bullets, broken glass, knives, and guns. Other useful pieces of evidence criminals are less likely to think about are descriptions, provided by the coroner, of incisions and bruises on the victim’s body. These descriptions can provide clues to the scientists on what kind of weapon was used for the crime. Before anyone can begin doing all this, however, they must receive an education.
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 relationship between law enforcement and prosecutors, which goes hand-in-hand, can’t be overlooked. Evidence of a crime that detectives and law enforcement discover is as equally important as a good trial on part of the prosecution. If detectives aren’t able to find good solid evidence – that case usually isn’t bothered in being pursued. Several years ago, in the late 80’s, there was a murder case in Southeastern Oklahoma which now serves as a tragic example to the need for honest, constitutional work in the criminal justice system. Disreputable investigative procedures, fraudulent sources, and bad evidence were the foundation of this case that shattered innocent lives.
The New York Times bestseller book titled Reasonable Doubts: The Criminal Justice System and the O.J. Simpson Case examines the O.J. Simpson criminal trial of the mid-1990s. The author, Alan M. Dershowitz, relates the Simpson case to the broad functions and perspectives of the American criminal justice system as a whole. A Harvard law school teacher at the time and one of the most renowned legal minds in the country, Dershowitz served as one of O.J. Simpson’s twelve defense lawyers during the trial. Dershowitz utilizes the Simpson case to illustrate how today’s criminal justice system operates and relates it to the misperceptions of the public. Many outside spectators of the case firmly believed that Simpson committed the crimes for which he was charged for. Therefore, much of the public was simply dumbfounded when Simpson was acquitted. Dershowitz attempts to explain why the jury acquitted Simpson by examining the entire American criminal justice system as a whole.
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
John Grisham, a famous writer and author for court cases and criminal law, explained the rationale for his writing journey in “Boxers, Briefs and Books.” His opinion-editorial entry in the New York Times illustrates his rags-to-riches story: that of from starting in “dead-end jobs” to becoming one who truly loves writing. The most interesting aspect of his evolution into a writer is how he grew out of a dark life into a great storyteller out of his very experiences during his tenure as a lawyer. Throughout his life before he became a writer, Grisham’s life is comparable to a majority of many others, and he experienced the struggles of climbing up the ladder of life and finally to success. From dirty plumbing work to a humiliating experience
have never heard of it before. After watching it I was glad to get a
The Pelican Brief 1º Summary Two Supreme Court Judges has been murdered. Darby Shaw, a law student, wrote a brief (The Pelican Brief) about the linking between the two murders and Vitor Mattience, the owner of an oil company which wants to build a factory in the Louisiana's Marshlands and also a close fiend of the United States' President. Shaw gave the brief to his teacher (and boyfriend) Thomas Callaham who gave it to a FBI lawyer friend of him. Several days after Callaham is murdered by a bomb-car.
We do have known what forensics is. Forensics that we know is an application of various sciences to answer questions that are important to legal system in which it may be related to a crime. Forensics generallu covering something or methods of a scientific nature and also the rules established from the facts of the event, to do an introduction to physical evidence. This is just a usual forensics. Nowadays, forensics is not just like that, digital devices are everywhere today, helping people to communicate with other people globally, not just between town. We can use that to do some forensics thing too, and find the evidence. It is called Digital Forensics.