More handpicked essays just for you.
The importance of crime scene investigation
Importance of crime scene investigation
Importance of crime scene investigation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The importance of crime scene investigation
The acceptance of fingerprint identification in the judicial system as scientific evidence has become like expert testimony. Advances in image processing have impacted how fingerprints can be lifted without being destroyed, which has led to fingerprint evidence becoming the silent testimony leading to more conventions. In the case of the United States v. Byron C. Mitchell Criminal Action No. 96-00407, fingerprints found in the car were the scientific evidence which identified Mitchell as a participant in an armored car robbery (Appellant Counsel for Appellee, 2003). The issues in the case of United States v. Byron C. Mitchell, Criminal No. 96-00407, began in 1991, when an armored car employee was robbed by two men. The two men exchanged gun fire with the armored car employee, while fleeing in another car driven by a third suspect who was believed to be Byron C. Mitchell (Appellant Counsel for Appellee, 2003). The fingerprints were found on the gear shift lever and driver’s side door of the getaway car, which according to court documents the fingerprints identification and a mysterious note written by an anonymous witness was the strongest evidence linking Mitchell to the robbery. However, the admission of the fingerprint evidence …show more content…
The tire depth was worn down to approximately 3/32 of an inch while according to data the tread depth on new tires is approximately 11/32 of an inch (Legal Information Institute, n.d.). Carlson also disclosed that the tires had punctures which had not been properly repaired; there were also signs of deterioration along the sidewalls, and enough over-deflection to cause separation (Legal Information Institute, n.d.). Despite these disclosures Carlson concluded that the blow-out was caused by a defect causing
Facts: Rex Marshall testified that the deceased came into his store intoxicated, and started whispering things to his wife. The defendant stated that he ordered the deceased out of the store immediately, however the deceased refused to leave and started acting in an aggressive manner; by slamming his hate down on the counter. He then reached for the hammer, the defendant states he had reason to believe the deceased was going to hit him with the hammer attempting to kill him. Once the deceased reached for the hammer the defendant shot him almost immediately.
...idence in the conviction of Melanie McGuire. According to Champod (2004), Beth Dunton may have skipped important steps necessary to collecting fingerprints from the trash bags. If fingerprints had been collected from the trash bags, this could have cleared Melanie or added to the mountain of evidence against her. According to Rossmo (2009), all of the circumstantial evidence gathered by investigators could have been declared coincidental. There was no “smoking gun” to convict Melanie. Despite possible errors, the investigative team was successful in remaining free of bias being that the evidence collected by two different investigative teams led to Melanie McGuire as the suspect and ultimately to her conviction. Human error is inevitable while conducting investigation, but ultimately a jury of peers found Melanie McGuire guilty of the alleged crimes (Glatt, 2008).
In the U.S. Supreme Court case of U.S. v Lopez (1995), a twelfth grade boy, Alfonzo Lopez, brought a loaded .38 caliber firearm to his local Texas high school. After being reported to the front office, Lopez was questioned about the gun and openly admitted that the firearm was in his possession. Texas then convicted Alfonzo of a criminal statute, which prohibited the carrying of a gun on school grounds. However, the charges were dropped rather quickly when the United States Government charged Lopez with violating the Gun-Free School Zones Act.
In 1989 the National Research Council Committee on DNA Technology in Forensic Science was developed due to numerous scientific and legal issues (The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence). The National Research Council’s key role was to analyze statistical and population genetic issues in the use of DNA evidence and review major alternative approaches to statistical evaluation of DNA evidence (The Evaluation of Forensic DNA, 50). Over the past fifteen years DNA profiling has made tremendous advancements and continuous improvements in the fight against violent
Nowadays, DNA is a crucial component of a crime scene investigation, used to both to identify perpetrators from crime scenes and to determine a suspect’s guilt or innocence (Butler, 2005). The method of constructing a distinctive “fingerprint” from an individual’s DNA was first described by Alec Jeffreys in 1985. He discovered regions of repetitions of nucleotides inherent in DNA strands that differed from person to person (now known as variable number of tandem repeats, or VNTRs), and developed a technique to adjust the length variation into a definitive identity marker (Butler, 2005). Since then, DNA fingerprinting has been refined to be an indispensible source of evidence, expanded into multiple methods befitting different types of DNA samples. One of the more controversial practices of DNA forensics is familial DNA searching, which takes partial, rather than exact, matches between crime scene DNA and DNA stored in a public database as possible leads for further examination and information about the suspect. Using familial DNA searching for investigative purposes is a reliable and advantageous method to convict criminals.
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 article Do Fingerprints Lie? was written by Michael Specter. It challenges the subject of whether fingerprint evidence is flawless as it is generally accepted in court. For a very long time, the US court system would accept any sort of "expert testimony", regardless of whether they were legitimately experts. Opinions that were "generally accepted" in the field were allowed, even if they weren't factually proven. The case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals brought this into a more critical light and created stricter guidelines for what could be admissible.
This same article examines the history of DNA evidence and acknowledges that when evidence was first introduced to the courts that the new type of identification was initially accepted without any challenges, however, critics quickly contended that DNA tests were problematic because of the reliability and the validity of probative value of the evidence. For example, DNA exoneration cases suggest that errors in forensic identification led to a high number of wrongful convictions and concerns that media coverage portrayals of forensic science evidence on popular television shows leads jurors to unfairly weigh DNA evidence while making their decision about the facts of a trial (Carrell, 2008). Moreover, in recent DNA exoneration cases the courts and jurors had difficulty analyzing the testimony of the experts on forensic identification evidence. According to the article, in 86 DNA exoneration cases, forensic science testing errors were the second leading cause of wrongful conviction, falling behind wrongful eyewitness misidentification (Carrell,
The three different main types of fingerprints are Loops, Arches, and Whorls (Jackson 1). Henry Faulds is known as the Father of Fingerprints and developing fingerprints (Jackson 1). His discovery of fingerprints has made a huge impact not only in his time but, in Modern Crime Scene Investigation (Jackson 1). Without fingerprinting, it would be very difficult to convict criminals of crimes and very hard to try to process information. Crime Scene Investigators make a huge impact in Forensic Science. We need CSI workers, without them people could only imagine what crime would be like not only in our community, but in our
“DNA samples of semen retrieved from the crime scene matched blood drawn from Andrews. At that time, no state had a DNA databank. However, after witnessing the power of DNA evidence, state courts and state legislatures would soon grapple with the issue of whether DNA evidence should be admitted at trial as identity evidence and whether establishing state DNA databanks would be feasible and of value to law enforcement. A review of current law reveals that almost every state has embraced and institutionalized the utilization of DNA fingerprinting for crime fighting purposes” (Hibbert,
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
Fingerprints are among the most common forensic identifiers, but they are not infallible due to their susceptibility to degradation. Fingerprints are assigned to each of us upon development and remain the same throughout our lifetime. The distinctive patterns we recognize as fingerprints can be attributed to ridges and the oils contained on the surface of our fingers. From an evolutionary standpoint fingerprints allow humans to grasp objects, by increasing friction on our finger pads. Fingerprints are dusted by using a brush coated with fingerprinting powder and sweeping the brush over the fingerprint, where the powder sticks to the oils deposited from a fingerprint (Scientific American, 2002). The method in which fingerprints are identified
Michael, K. (2010). The legal, social and ethical controversy of the collection and storage of fingerprint profiles and DNA samples in forensic science. In K. Michael (Eds.), 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society: Social Implications of Emerging Technologies, 48-60. Retrieved from http://works.bepress.com/kmichael/429/
During the 19th century the study of fingerprints had emerged. The past few centuries we have had numerous developments in fingerprinting. A lot of people give this credit to Francis Galton, who conducted the first study of fingerprint patterns. Galton’s research showed that no two fingerprints are identical; his theory on fingerprints changed the world and the criminal justice system as a whole. Galton studied numerous fingerprints and came to the conclusion that not even identical twins will have the same fingerprints. This finding helped build the justice system and forensic science as we all once knew it. According to Galton fingerprint impressions fall into three different categories, they are loop, arch, and whorl. Another fingerprint known as latent print is a fingerprint that is formed by sweat. This type of fingerprint is not visible to the naked eye; usually a gray or black powder is used to pick up latent prints. Now that we know the three basic categories of fingerprinting, we must take a better look at how fingerprints are identified. Once we understand how they’re identified to others, we will look at some of the landmark cases that helped DNA become what it is today.
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