Unvalidated or Improper Forensic Science - Revision history

Ibjadmin at 12:45, 10 May 2011

2011-05-10T12:45:54Z

Ibjadmin: /* Types of fingerprints */

2011-05-10T12:44:41Z

Types of fingerprints

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:44, 10 May 2011
Line 23:		Line 23:
	There are two types of fingerprints namely-		There are two types of fingerprints namely-

	* ~~�Rolled~~' or ~~�inked~~' prints: obtained by individuals inking their fingers and rolling each fingertip from edge to edge on paper - these are also called ~~�known~~ fingerprints' because the identity of the person is known when they are taken and		* 'Rolled' or 'inked' prints: obtained by individuals inking their fingers and rolling each fingertip from edge to edge on paper - these are also called 'known fingerprints' because the identity of the person is known when they are taken and

	* Latent fingerprints- obtained by using fingerprint powder to make the latent print visible. Once the latent print is made visible, tape is used to lift the latent print from its original surface onto a lift card. These lift cards are examined by fingerprint identification experts who compare the friction ridge detail in the known print. Both types are utilized in the criminal justice system		* Latent fingerprints- obtained by using fingerprint powder to make the latent print visible. Once the latent print is made visible, tape is used to lift the latent print from its original surface onto a lift card. These lift cards are examined by fingerprint identification experts who compare the friction ridge detail in the known print. Both types are utilized in the criminal justice system

Ibjadmin: /* Types of forensic evidence */

2011-05-10T12:44:27Z

Types of forensic evidence

Ddemetriou at 08:10, 24 June 2010

2010-06-24T08:10:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:10, 24 June 2010
Line 5:		Line 5:
	===Types of forensic evidence===		===Types of forensic evidence===

	There are numerous types of forensic evidence. ~~This~~ can include fingerprints, DNA and hair. There are many other types of forensic evidence, yet these 3 are some of the most common types which produce unvalidated or improper evidence.		There are numerous types of forensic evidence. These can include fingerprints, DNA and hair. There are many other types of forensic evidence, yet these 3 are some of the most common types which produce unvalidated or improper evidence.

	== Fingerprints ==		== Fingerprints ==

Ibjadmin: /* Additional factors undermining forensic evidence */

2010-06-15T20:24:50Z

Additional factors undermining forensic evidence

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:24, 15 June 2010
Line 140:		Line 140:

	* Another problem that arises is that the forensic experts themselves are employed by either the prosecution or defense. Therefore, this may introduce bias into the case, and so only certain types of evidence beneficial to their side will be investigated. Also, there is a high probability that forensic evidence will be beneficial to the prosecution because the police, when collecting evidence, often have a suspect in mind, and so the forensic scientist is only asked to confirm the suspicions of the police. The other problem with this method is that the police may tend to collect evidence that will uphold their theory that their suspect is the correct person.		* Another problem that arises is that the forensic experts themselves are employed by either the prosecution or defense. Therefore, this may introduce bias into the case, and so only certain types of evidence beneficial to their side will be investigated. Also, there is a high probability that forensic evidence will be beneficial to the prosecution because the police, when collecting evidence, often have a suspect in mind, and so the forensic scientist is only asked to confirm the suspicions of the police. The other problem with this method is that the police may tend to collect evidence that will uphold their theory that their suspect is the correct person.

			----
			See [[Causes of Wrongful Convictions]]

Ibjadmin: /* Background */

2010-06-04T08:32:25Z

Background

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:32, 4 June 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Background ==		== Background ==

	Forensic Science refers to the application of a broad spectrum of sciences in an attempt to answer questions of interest to a legal system.		Forensic Science refers to the application of a broad spectrum of sciences in an attempt to answer questions of interest to a legal system. Forensic science has shaped the world of justice, fuelling crime investigations and signifying the progress of modern technology. Forensics may be used in relation to a criminal or civil action. Forensic science may conver for example modern computer/clay facial reconstruction, DNA fingerprinting, Autopsy techniques, forensic anthropology, toxicology and much more.

	Forensic science has shaped the world of justice, fuelling crime investigations and signifying the progress of modern technology. Forensics may be used in relation to a criminal or civil action.

	Forensic science may conver for example modern computer/clay facial reconstruction, DNA fingerprinting, Autopsy techniques, forensic anthropology, toxicology and much more.

	===Types of forensic evidence===		===Types of forensic evidence===

Ddemetriou at 12:51, 1 June 2010

2010-06-01T12:51:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:51, 1 June 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Background ==		== Background ==

	Forensic Science refers to the application of a broad spectrum of sciences in an attempt to answer questions of interest to a legal system. It has shaped the world of justice, fuelling crime investigations and signifying the progress of modern technology. Forensics may be used in relation to a criminal or civil action.		Forensic Science refers to the application of a broad spectrum of sciences in an attempt to answer questions of interest to a legal system.

			Forensic science has shaped the world of justice, fuelling crime investigations and signifying the progress of modern technology. Forensics may be used in relation to a criminal or civil action.

	Forensic science may conver for example modern computer/clay facial reconstruction, DNA fingerprinting, Autopsy techniques, forensic anthropology, toxicology and much more.		Forensic science may conver for example modern computer/clay facial reconstruction, DNA fingerprinting, Autopsy techniques, forensic anthropology, toxicology and much more.

Ddemetriou at 09:42, 1 June 2010

2010-06-01T09:42:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:42, 1 June 2010
Line 32:		Line 32:
	===Points of match===		===Points of match===





	===Accuracy of fingerprints===		===Accuracy of fingerprints===

Ddemetriou at 09:32, 1 June 2010

2010-06-01T09:32:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:32, 1 June 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Background ==		== Background ==

	Forensic Science is the application of a broad spectrum of sciences to answer questions of interest to a legal system. It has shaped the world of justice, fuelling crime investigations and signifying the progress of modern technology. Forensics may be used in relation to a criminal or civil action.		Forensic Science refers to the application of a broad spectrum of sciences in an attempt to answer questions of interest to a legal system. It has shaped the world of justice, fuelling crime investigations and signifying the progress of modern technology. Forensics may be used in relation to a criminal or civil action.
	Forensic science may conver for example modern computer/clay facial reconstruction, DNA fingerprinting, Autopsy techniques, forensic anthropology, toxicology and much more.		Forensic science may conver for example modern computer/clay facial reconstruction, DNA fingerprinting, Autopsy techniques, forensic anthropology, toxicology and much more.

	===Types of forensic evidence===		===Types of forensic evidence===

	There are numerous types of forensic evidence. This can include fingerprints, DNA and hair. There are many other types of forensic evidence, yet these 3 are some of the most common types which produce ~~invalidated~~ evidence.		There are numerous types of forensic evidence. This can include fingerprints, DNA and hair. There are many other types of forensic evidence, yet these 3 are some of the most common types which produce unvalidated or improper evidence.

	== Fingerprints ==		== Fingerprints ==

Ddemetriou at 09:29, 1 June 2010

2010-06-01T09:29:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:29, 1 June 2010
Line 136:		Line 136:
	== Additional factors undermining forensic evidence ==		== Additional factors undermining forensic evidence ==

	* '''Issue with factfinder''' - If we are dealing with a jurisdiction where the jury is deciding if the accused is guilty and whether the evidence presented proves this, there might be a problem.		* '''Issue with factfinder''' - If we are dealing with a jurisdiction where the jury is deciding if the accused is guilty and whether the evidence presented proves this, there might be a problem. The jury does not have the expertise to fully understand the forensic evidence, thus the expert must write a detailed but understandable report and present it to them. This can be problematic because by simplifying the case for the jury to understand, the expert may omit a vital piece of evidence. Throughout the investigation, the forensic expert may not know the details of the case, and so there is a possibility that he does not know which piece of information discovered is crucial to the case. If something of importance is not extracted from the expert during questioning, vital information may never be found out, until an appeal is launched.
	The jury does not have the expertise to fully understand the forensic evidence, thus the expert must write a detailed but understandable report and present it to them. This can be problematic because by simplifying the case for the jury to understand, the expert may omit a vital piece of evidence. Throughout the investigation, the forensic expert may not know the details of the case, and so there is a possibility that he does not know which piece of information discovered is crucial to the case. If something of importance is not extracted from the expert during questioning, vital information may never be found out, until an appeal is launched.

	* Another problem that arises is that the forensic experts themselves are employed by either the prosecution or defense. Therefore, this may introduce bias into the case, and so only certain types of evidence beneficial to their side will be investigated. Also, there is a high probability that forensic evidence will be beneficial to the prosecution because the police, when collecting evidence, often have a suspect in mind, and so the forensic scientist is only asked to confirm the suspicions of the police. The other problem with this method is that the police may tend to collect evidence that will uphold their theory that their suspect is the correct person.		* Another problem that arises is that the forensic experts themselves are employed by either the prosecution or defense. Therefore, this may introduce bias into the case, and so only certain types of evidence beneficial to their side will be investigated. Also, there is a high probability that forensic evidence will be beneficial to the prosecution because the police, when collecting evidence, often have a suspect in mind, and so the forensic scientist is only asked to confirm the suspicions of the police. The other problem with this method is that the police may tend to collect evidence that will uphold their theory that their suspect is the correct person.

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:45, 10 May 2011
Line 31:		Line 31:
	===Points of match===		===Points of match===

	Fingerprint experts reach a conclusion as to whether the fingerprints found at the crime scene match those of the accused on the basis of ~~�matching~~ points'.		Fingerprint experts reach a conclusion as to whether the fingerprints found at the crime scene match those of the accused on the basis of 'matching points'.

	At the moment there are no universal standards of matching points. Examiners historically have employed identification standards ranging from eight to sixteen matching characteristics, or "points of similarity."~~�Yet~~, the FBI has stated that there should be no minimum standard and that the determination of whether there is a sufficient basis for an identification should be left to the subjective judgment of the individual examiner. The same is applied in the United Kingdom. On the contrary, other countries have set standards. For example, Australia has a minimum standard of twelve matching ridge characteristics whereas France and Italy have sixteen.		At the moment there are no universal standards of matching points. Examiners historically have employed identification standards ranging from eight to sixteen matching characteristics, or "points of similarity.". Yet, the FBI has stated that there should be no minimum standard and that the determination of whether there is a sufficient basis for an identification should be left to the subjective judgment of the individual examiner. The same is applied in the United Kingdom. On the contrary, other countries have set standards. For example, Australia has a minimum standard of twelve matching ridge characteristics whereas France and Italy have sixteen.

	===Accuracy of fingerprints===		===Accuracy of fingerprints===

	The assumption that fingerprint evidence is one hundred percent accurate in determining an individual'~~s�identity�is~~ a fact that NEITHER science NOR law can prove with any certainty because the question has never been posed or empirically studied.		The assumption that fingerprint evidence is one hundred percent accurate in determining an individual's identity is a fact that NEITHER science NOR law can prove with any certainty because the question has never been posed or empirically studied.

	Even if one assumes that it is true that no two people in the world have the same fingerprint, this argument is logically flawed when it comes to the identification of latent fingerprint fragments. It simply does not follow from this that a fingerprint examiner can reliably make an identification from a small distorted fingerprint fragment that might reveal only a small number of ridge characteristics.		Even if one assumes that it is true that no two people in the world have the same fingerprint, this argument is logically flawed when it comes to the identification of latent fingerprint fragments. It simply does not follow from this that a fingerprint examiner can reliably make an identification from a small distorted fingerprint fragment that might reveal only a small number of ridge characteristics.
Line 60:		Line 60:
	2. '''CTS 2007 Latent Fingerprint Proficiency Test'''- The test materials included two latent prints produced by people whose known prints were not provided. Yet four examiners incorrectly matched one of the latent prints to one of the known's, three matched a latent to an innocent suspect, and a fourth one matched a latent to an innocent bank employee.		2. '''CTS 2007 Latent Fingerprint Proficiency Test'''- The test materials included two latent prints produced by people whose known prints were not provided. Yet four examiners incorrectly matched one of the latent prints to one of the known's, three matched a latent to an innocent suspect, and a fourth one matched a latent to an innocent bank employee.

	There is a clear lack of universal standards both in matching points but also in what experts are looking for when comparing fingerprints. There are varying beliefs amongst experts as to the number, nomenclature, and frequency of the standard ridge characteristics. In addition, another worrying fact is that there are no mandatory qualifications to become a fingerprint examiner. Even though the Scientific Working Group on Friction Ridge Analysis, Study, and Technology (SWGFAST) adopted ~~quality�assurance�guidelines�for�latent�print�examination�in~~ 1997, these guidelines are optional, not mandatory. Lastly, it has been established that fingerprint identification Is based upon the subjective decision of the examiner, NOT science. Although computers might be used to initially retrieve the known fingerprint records to compare to the latents, this ~~merely�~~ "~~provides� a� list� of�~~ candidates . . . [but the] direct comparisons are made by a fingerprint examiner."		There is a clear lack of universal standards both in matching points but also in what experts are looking for when comparing fingerprints. There are varying beliefs amongst experts as to the number, nomenclature, and frequency of the standard ridge characteristics. In addition, another worrying fact is that there are no mandatory qualifications to become a fingerprint examiner. Even though the Scientific Working Group on Friction Ridge Analysis, Study, and Technology (SWGFAST) adopted quality assurance guidelines for latent print examination in 1997, these guidelines are optional, not mandatory. Lastly, it has been established that fingerprint identification Is based upon the subjective decision of the examiner, NOT science. Although computers might be used to initially retrieve the known fingerprint records to compare to the latents, this merely "provides a list of candidates . . . [but the] direct comparisons are made by a fingerprint examiner."

	== DNA ==		== DNA ==
Line 90:		Line 90:
	===Data of erroneous DNA testing===		===Data of erroneous DNA testing===

	* In 2001, Arizona state crime lab analyst Kathryn Troyer was running tests when she found two felons with remarkably similar genetic profiles. They matched at 9 of the 13 locations on chromosomes, or loci, commonly used to distinguish people. Despite the fact that the FBI estimated the odds of finding unrelated people sharing those genetic markers to be 1 in 113 billion, she found the men to be unrelated and of different races, one was black and the other white. - Since then, Troyer found dozens of similar ~~�matches~~'.		* In 2001, Arizona state crime lab analyst Kathryn Troyer was running tests when she found two felons with remarkably similar genetic profiles. They matched at 9 of the 13 locations on chromosomes, or loci, commonly used to distinguish people. Despite the fact that the FBI estimated the odds of finding unrelated people sharing those genetic markers to be 1 in 113 billion, she found the men to be unrelated and of different races, one was black and the other white. - Since then, Troyer found dozens of similar 'matches'.

	* In the US case of GILBERT ALEJANDRO, the forensic expert testified that he had conducted DNA testing and obtained results inculpating Alejandro. He referred to the patterns as being ~~�identical~~' to those of Alejandro and that they could only have originated from him. He gave no random match criteria for this DNA inclusion, but falsely told the jury that "DNA typing is a hundred percent identity as to whether a blood or body fluid may have originated from a particular donor or not." A subsequent internal inquiry concluded that he had at best compared only partial banding pattern results visually; LATER TESTS EXCLUDED ALEJANDRO		* In the US case of GILBERT ALEJANDRO, the forensic expert testified that he had conducted DNA testing and obtained results inculpating Alejandro. He referred to the patterns as being 'identical' to those of Alejandro and that they could only have originated from him. He gave no random match criteria for this DNA inclusion, but falsely told the jury that "DNA typing is a hundred percent identity as to whether a blood or body fluid may have originated from a particular donor or not." A subsequent internal inquiry concluded that he had at best compared only partial banding pattern results visually; LATER TESTS EXCLUDED ALEJANDRO

	* Another invalid DNA testimony can be seen in the case of STATE OF TEXAS v. JOSIAH SUTTON. The victim was raped by two men. Semen was found in the vaginal swab and on the stain removed from the back seat where the rape occurred. The official report presented invalid DNA results. The raw data and the analyst's bench notes indicated that whereas the vaginal sample reflected a mixture of the victim's DNA and DNA from two male donors, the semen stain on the car seat suggested it came from one man only and that the lone male could not be Sutton. Although Sutton was excluded as the source of the car seat semen stain, that conclusion was not mentioned in the official report nor in the analyst's testimony at trial.		* Another invalid DNA testimony can be seen in the case of STATE OF TEXAS v. JOSIAH SUTTON. The victim was raped by two men. Semen was found in the vaginal swab and on the stain removed from the back seat where the rape occurred. The official report presented invalid DNA results. The raw data and the analyst's bench notes indicated that whereas the vaginal sample reflected a mixture of the victim's DNA and DNA from two male donors, the semen stain on the car seat suggested it came from one man only and that the lone male could not be Sutton. Although Sutton was excluded as the source of the car seat semen stain, that conclusion was not mentioned in the official report nor in the analyst's testimony at trial.