In this case study I will examine the forensic evidence (limited to the main ballistic evidence), that was presented in the criminal trials and the forensic evidence that was introduced by the prosecution.…
Evidence at a crime scene, such as blood, DNA, fingerprints, or shoeprints all help forensic investigators determine what might have occurred and help identify or exonerate potential suspects.…
Why is evidence important in forensic science? What evidence was important in the episodes? Why?…
The next step is for the investigator to take notes of the crime scene. The process of note taking should be extensive, containing even notes they may seem insignificant but may become valuable evidence later (Fisher & Fisher, 2012). At this point evidence should not be moved or touched. Next pictures are taken at the crime just as it happened. The pictures should include scales to show accuracy in the evidence produced. Next is sketching the areas where the evidence was found is a way to support the picture evidence at court. The sketches should be accurate and contain measurements of the scene.…
Forensic evidence has been used since the beginning of investigating. It could be anything from ammunition, to a handprint on the door, to the drops of blood on the crime scene. As seen in “Forensic Evidence” by Andrea Campbell, the indisputable forensic evidence is the best kind to use in a trial.…
As a Crime Scene Investigator (CSI), there are duties that have to be met and a job that has to get done. Part of this job is looking for evidence. There are different types of evidence. Some can be seen with an unaided eye and some can't. Trace evidence cannot be seen with an unaided eye. Every person who is physically involved with a crime leaves some kind of trace evidence such as hair, fibers, and even have gunshot residue left on the perpetrators hands. It is even possible to obtain a confession from the suspect .…
1. Why do you think it is so important to use proper methods when collecting evidence from a crime scene?…
1. It is important to use proper methods while collecting evidence from a crime scene because evidence is extremely important in solving a crime, and improper collection could corrupt the entire investigation. Evidence may become contaminated if proper methods are not used, which could severely effect analysis outcomes. Additionally, specific procedures must be followed for evidence to be used in a court room. Therefore, it is extremely important to gather evidence with proper methods in order for that evidence to be useful in a court of law.…
Beaufort-Moore, D. (2009) Crime Scene Management and Evidence Recovery. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chapter 2 (p26- 37)…
Direct and circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence differs from direct evidence in that direct evidence can directly support the case and prove probable cause on its own where circumstantial evidence is when the evidence indirectly supports the case. An example of circumstantial evidence would be something like “I observed the suspect enter the victim’s house, and I then heard a shot. I saw the suspect calmly walk out of the house, furtively look around, get in his car and drive off.” This differs from direct evidence, as direct evidence requires you to observe the act as it happens. This statement would look something like this: “I observed the suspect walk up to the victim, argue with him, and then pull out a gun and shoot the victim. He then ran to his car and drove off.” These are two very different statements, and mean two very different…
Evidence is any information gathered at the scene of a crime that may be relevant to a criminal investigation. There are different types of evidence that varies from Paperwork, Photographs, DNA, Finger prints; etc... These different kinds of evidence also require different types of opinions and explanations. Analyzing DNA is the best way to get your evidence. Every effort must be made to ensure that evidence is not lost, damaged, or contaminated. Evidence has many different roles in the investigation of a crime. It can link…
Often times lines become blurred regarding inductions and deductive reasoning as they apply to forensic sciences. Inductions are described by Thornton (1997b, p. 13) as an inference that is derived by specific observations to a generalization, or an assumption that may not always be valid. On the other hand, a deductive reasoning is defined as a forensics-evidence-based, process-oriented method of investigative reasoning based off of the behavioral patterns of a particular offender (Turvey, 1999). Historically, forensic scientists have failed to recognize the importance of inductions and deductive reasoning as a critical process in conducting investigations. Thus resulting in a hypothesis being falsely categorized as a deductive conclusion; when in fact it remains nothing more than a statement until supported by follow on testing (Thornton & Kirk, 1997).…
What is the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence? Give two practical examples of each.…
Similar fact evidence is circumstantial evidence because it is not direct. Direct evidence is a testimony of an eyewitness. Since the person stating the evidence is not a eyewitness, the evidence is circumstantial.…
Does all evidences can be used to convict a person? Circumstantial evidence is an indirect evidence that relies on connection with a particular case, but can’t be used as a proving alone. People have different thought of should circumstantial evidence can be use to convict a person. In my opinion, circumstantial evidence should never use for declaration of guilt because of the following reason. First, it is not credible. Second, It does not contain any or non scientific analysis. Last but not least, Because of circumstantial evidence, many innocent people are punished.…