Free Essay Sample on Forensic Science

Forensic science can make or break a case. Juries expect it due to television. Yet forensic science is a field that constantly evolves and has convicted the innocent. How can we trust forensic science, is it inherently bad to use?

The Daubert screening when performed by a judge who has little education in forensic science and lets evidence be admitted or withheld.

To determine if forensic science is good or bad, we must first understand what determines forensic science. Experts are questioned by both opposing and defense to explain what the data means. When this happens, the expert may use his/her opinion and science. Yet there have been critical errors in forensic science. Beyond the fact that those experts may fabricate the evidence or conceal the error rate. 

DNA technology which people believe is the gold standard in forensic science. Jurors are accustomed to ballistic, blood, lab, firearms, and tool marks, from television programs. They mistakenly believe that the experts and the evidence are undisputable. Sometimes the evidence is contaminated, and the researcher is unaware. Unlike television, every expert in each field is not always within the same lab and slanted analysis can lead to wrongful convictions.

With every test known there is always a chance that the result could be incorrect. While we like to think forensic science and DNA are perfect they cannot be a hundred percent accurate due to human error in collecting, and cross-contamination. Another aspect is that at times we use samples collected by individuals for testing at home. Ancestry testing to explore their heritage is not collected by the same stringent means as in a legal case. These kits that sell online and in stores focus on specific interests. The analysis only partial information and can often lead to people being a suspect without the proper testing. To perform an adequate sequencing technology the DNA strands must be analyzed and no bioinformatic shortcuts. This comes at an immense price on both sides of the legal system equally suffer from funding.

How can we be certain about forensic science and the technology used? Forensic laboratories conduct in-house studies in assessing their systems, but the data is not publicly available, attributing it to privacy concerns regarding the testing samples. Considering what number of individuals play a part in a DNA mixture, distinguishing one person’s DNA from another and resolving if the DNA is even pertinent to the crime can be difficult. More labs that are centralized with all the specialists that one may see on television are indeed the answer. 

The Innocence Project works at the national level in supporting efforts to improve forensic science through research and standards-setting. Accountability to adhere to very stringent standards will help improve the results of the science. Education within the judicial system especially when the Daubert system determines when to admit evidence is essential. 

The legal community must realize that a scientist creates a report based on the data given and then generates it in their labs for interpretation. In making sure that labs that analyze the samples given to them, take care of their machinery and performed the necessary calibration as well as if there were any internal problems noted. If there were problems how often did, they occur, was one person identified as having the problems. All the testing equipment should have a policy about the labeling of the equipment for maintenance schedule. The inspection of the dialogue between the person submitting the documents to the lab or scientific review is recorded and logged. A well-maintained lab with strict rules, testing as well as Accreditation is necessary for scrutiny, and audits are necessary for accountability. Logs should be requested from the lab about their procedures. The legal system and all those who participate should know a great deal about the evidence they are admitting and that includes expert witnesses who explain forensic science. 

Proper use of forensic science no matter what side you are on should start with discovery. An interview with the expert before the testimony in court can help your organizational structure of when to use them as well as exhibits. Usage of exhibits can explain to an average person or confuse them. The resume of the expert needs to be scrutinized, and educational experience is always confirmed. The employee records if discoverable within the law, should be ask for, and any gaps explored.

All the suggestions take time to put into practice by the lawyers, and police department investigators. If the courts want to use forensic science, then they also must set aside for the proper application and assure the courts, and juries that the evidence provided fulfill the rigorous standards and develop ways where experts can explain how they concluded the science without using their interpretations.