Blog 7: Forensic Science Mishaps

Forensic science is still a growing field. In the recent Casey Anthony trial forensic science was misused and construed. New forms of decomposition science were introduced, but not backed up with previous testings. There was no proof the tests were accurate. Other issues were the misuse of hair testing. They stated the hair sample from the trunk told them Caylee was in the trunk. When truly, there was no DNA sample on the hair. The follicle was not present. It is what contains the DNA in the hair sample. They could only limit where the hair came from. They also tried to tie together evidence even when expert testimony did not configure in that manner. Some wonder if the trial would have gone differently without the use of forensic science. Today's criminal court is too dependent on forensic evidence. The jury has become dependent on the DNA or fingerprints. Most crimes do not leave any DNA due to cleaning with bleach. Some criminals do not leave fingerprints due to gloves. Some trials will not have any forensics. One such example is murder with a knife where the killer uses a glove. The hit television series Dexter, although it is not a good source for forensic knowledge, shows that a murder can be done and leave no trace of a crime. Some cases that can be decided without forensic evidence may be misjudged by the jury due to the lack of forensic evidence. Television shows such as CSI could be to blame. They show that evidence is quickly processed and every crime has at least three pieces of hard evidence on their show. Where some crimes in real life may have one piece of evidence if they are lucky. Others may have quite a bit more. I do not wish to say that forensic evidence is unimportant, just that the lack or misuse of it should not "break" a case. In the case mentioned earlier,Time News Feed goes through the process in how the evidence was used inaccurately. I will enclose a few links to article they have prepared with a last comment on the situation. I am not to say that Casey was guilty of murdering her child, nor will I say she had no part in it. I only believe that this case proves  that forensic science used improperly will confuse a jury and destroy a case.
http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/06/27/casey-anthony-trial-forensic-evidence-comes-under-fire/
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2077937,00.html