1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Because eyewitness testimony can be fabricated and lied about, courts in first-

world nations place more weight on the evidence processed by technology from the crime

scene than they do from eyewitness testimony. Evidence gathered at the murder site and

examined in a lab, however, may be able to identify the true offender and reveal

fraudulent accusations and testimony from phony witnesses (Smith, 2022). The fact that

many persons in prison are truly innocent and were wrongly implicated as fall guys or

targets of retaliation by those who despised them is one of the issues in the Philippine

courts today. That issue can be resolved by a well-developed forensic laboratory.

Apparently, a dynamic field of knowledge and skills called forensic science can

be very useful and effective in criminal investigations. The importance of evidence in

resolving crimes in court, forensic evidence is a method of gathering and preserving

evidence that was discovered at the scene of a crime that may be used to solve the crime.

The investigator gathers all the evidence discovered at the crime scene, including

fingerprints, blood and other bodily fluids, hair, and any weapons that might have been

used in the crime and after processing in the forensic laboratory might be very important

in the court (Edmond, Cunliffe, Martire& San Roque, 2019).

Clearly, when establishing a case, forensic evidence is more persuasive. When an

investigator gathers all the pieces of evidence still present from the crime, they preserve it

to keep it intact and prevent it from dissolving because, after a short period of time, the

evidence must be destroyed. Evidence can be used in court to support other evidence and

identify the perpetrator of a crime. Forensic evidence is the term used to describe the
 2

scientific and unbiased knowledge acquired via the study, analysis, and interpretation of

physical evidence in the context of a criminal investigation or legal proceedings (Koehler,

2018).

The application of scientific and technical knowledge to criminal forensic

procedures, such as DNA analysis, automated fingerprint identification systems (AFIS),

and integrated ballistic identification systems (IBIS) ballistics systems, is the subject of a

sizable body of literature (Dhabal, Nandi, Sen, & Saha, 2022). To give accurate and

unbiased information about a crime or incident, this evidence is acquired and reviewed

using scientific procedures and methodologies. It is essential for establishing the truth,

locating suspects, connecting individuals with crime scenes, and helping to settle legal

disputes (Stern, Cuellar, & Kaye, 2019).

There seemed to be a sparse of literature and studies tackling the topic at hand

prompting the researchers to pursue this study and attempted to fill the existing gap,

particularly the relevance of forensic evidence presented in the courts of Kidapawan City.

Hence, the researchers decided to conduct a study to determine the baseline data

concerning therelevance of forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan City

 3

Statement of the Problem

The main intention of the study is to determine the level of relevance of forensic

result as court evidence in Kidapawan City. Specifically, it aimed to provide answers to

the following questions:

1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of:

1.1 Sex

1.2 Age

1.3 Length of service

2. What is the level of relevance of forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan

City in terms of:

2.1 Admissibility of forensic evidence

2.2 Weight of forensic evidence

3. Is there a significant difference in the level of relevance of forensic result as

court evidence in Kidapawan City when analyzed according to respondents’ demographic

profile?

Significance of the Study

The study would be beneficial to the following:

Legislators. The result of the study would be significant to the legislators by

passing a bill about the forensic evidences that must be accepted in the court endorsed by

a certified and trusted forensic examiner; thus, eyewitnesses’ testimony should be

corroborated by forensic facts.

Forensic Examiners. The findings of the study would serve as the basis of the

forensic personnel to do their job diligently and with accuracy considering that in the
 4

court’s decision, sending the wrong person in prison is not morally right; while on the

other hand, the conviction of the real culprit would bring justice to the victim when the

accurate forensic fact is presented.

Philippine National Police Personnel. The outcome of the study would serve as

the basis of the Philippine National Police personnel, particularly the investigators to

preserve the scene of the crime and prevent other officers and people from messing the

crime scene so that Scene of the Crime Operatives may gather the necessary evidences

for the forensic examiners.

Criminology Students. The findings of the study would be the basis of the

Criminology students to take evidences seriously as future law enforcers and uphold the

law by going after the real perpetrators of crime, and use evidences to determine the

criminal.

Future Researchers. The findings of the study would serve as the basis of the

future researchers to conduct another study, particularly incorporating Automated

Fingerprint Identification Systems (AFIS) in the airport security system for the inbound

and outbound passengers.

Scope and Limitation of the Study

The scope of this study is focused on the relevance of forensic result as court

evidence in Kidapawan City. The study will used a quantitative approach to research

methodology and a descriptive research design that includes a survey questionnaire to

gather data from key respondents. This study will be conducted during the academic year

2023-2024 in Kidapawan City. Moreover, this study aims to provide insights into the

relevance of forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan City.

 5

Definition of Terms

The terms used in this study are defined operationally as follows:

Court Evidence. This refers to the evidences presented to the court of law with

the corresponding exhibit number that would strengthen the case and could lead to the

conviction or acquittal of the accused or victim respectively.

Forensic Result. This refers to the result of examination of evidence using

forensic technology from a forensic laboratory ready to be presented in the court of law.

Relevance. This refers to the importance and relevance of forensic evidence to the

case being heard in the court of law that could sway the decision of the judge.

Related Literature

The excerpted literature review incorporated in this study provided various

perspectives on the topic taken from various reliable sources.

The forensic sciences have made significant scientific advances over the past 25

years, Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) typing, physical evidence databases, and new

scientific instruments), but more research is required to determine how these

developments have affected the use of scientific evidence in criminal case processing.

Although specific studies have assessed the significance of DNA evidence in

investigations into property crimes, no research have examined the whole range of

scientific evidence found at crime scenes. A dynamic field of knowledge and skills called

forensic science can be very useful and effective in criminal investigations. Evidence is

crucial to proving a case in court, and forensic evidence is a method of gathering and
 6

preserving evidence from crime scenes that may be used to prove a case (Ballantyne &

Wilson-Wilde, 2020).

Admissibility of Forensic Evidence. Also, it has been more than 25 years since

the National Institute of Justice sponsored research to look at the use of all types of

scientific evidence in the criminal justice system. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ)

seeks to advance its mission by sponsoring research that will provide "objective,

independent, evidence-based knowledge and tools to meet the challenges of crime and

justice, particularly at the State and local levels." In those 25 years, the forensic sciences

have made significant scientific advancements (DNA typing, physical evidence

databases, related scientific apparatus), yet most criminal investigations do not make use

of these innovations because of resource constraints. There have been more focused

studies on DNA testing, its costs, and how it affects solving cold cases and property

crimes, but none have looked at the whole range of physical evidence or how cases are

handled throughout the criminal justice system (Wilson-Wilde, 2018).

Arguably, the reality of forensic science is far different from how it is glorified in

the media as a profession that is always prepared to solve crimes at a moment's notice.

More than 70% of laboratory resources are used for routine drug and alcohol

identification cases, and by year's end 2002, crime laboratories had more than 500,000

backlogged requests. Without approving empirical research to evaluate results, Congress

has allocated funds to enhance testing and reduce backlogs. The National Institute of

Justice's choice to sponsor this research is therefore timely (National Institute of

Standards and Technology, 2020).

 7

Moreover, given the development of forensic science over the past 25 years, it

would not be their intention to duplicate previous work but rather to build on it while

taking into account the field's current circumstances. Although forensic science is based

on a solid laboratory science foundation, which gives it real and perceived value, it is

nonetheless housed within an overburdened legal system that is mostly made up of non

scientists who decide when and when that science will be employed. The fact that lab

resources are often not accessible to analyze or investigate the majority of crime scenes'

or evidence's constituent parts has a fundamentally essential impact on how scientific

evidence is used and interpreted (Wilson-Wilde, 2016).

Since the early 1970s, the number of forensic laboratories has almost quadrupled.

This increase can be attributed to several factors, including the drug abuse problem,

pressure on the police and courts to rely more on objective forms of evidence, scientific

advancements in areas like DNA testing that uniquely identify the source of biological

substances, and a popular culture that has embraced forensic science through fictional

and true crime media. Little published study has been done on the applications and

outcomes of forensic science evidence, despite these developments and the expansion of

forensic science services. Early research from the 1960s and 1970s showed that while

physical evidence was typically present at crime scenes, little scientific data was gathered

and had little bearing on the resolution of cases (Thompson, Black,Jain,&Kadane,2017).

Consequently, the National Institute of Justice provided funding for the most

thorough studies on the use of scientific evidence in case investigation and decision-

making in the 1980s. Clearance rates of offenses discovered at the police investigation

level were nearly three times higher in cases where such evidence was used than in cases
 8

where it was not. In a second study that was conducted in conjunction with it, it was

discovered that scientific evidence played a much larger role in sentencing decisions than

in decisions about whether to convict a defendant. Lab results were the only sort of

evidence that had any bearing on the sentence's length, and they typically increased the

likelihood of incarceration (Ballou 2019).

Weight of Forensic Evidence. Studies on the impact of physical evidence on the

results of police investigations and prosecutions were conducted in the 1970s and 1980s.

The Rand Corporation research was extremely critical of detective work and concluded

that the information provided by victims to the initial responding police was the most

important indicator of whether a crime would be solved. However, the reinforcement of

forensic evidence would make the case stronger and most likely would end up in a

conviction of the suspect (Almirall, Arkes, Lentini, Mowrer & Pawliszyn, 2017).

Traditional investigative methods, in particular the use of physical evidence, were not

very helpful in solving crimes. The study also discovered that latent fingerprints were

present in more than half of cases and that there was physical evidence available in most

of those cases, but that just 1% of those cases resulted in the identification of the

criminal. More than 70% of arrests did not result in conviction, but those that did

depended on three factors: the presence of tangible evidence, the proximity of two or

more witnesses, and the reduction of the time between the crime's commission and the

arrest. Sadly, the study could not identify concrete proof, and it was unknown whether a

crime lab had investigated this material (Edmond et al., 2019).

Recent study showed that just around half of police arrests resulted in official

charges being brought by a prosecutor. About 70–80% of the instances accused resulted
 9

in conviction, although 90% of those cases were settled by plea, and just 10% went to

trial. In 85% of the burglary cases studied by the Police Executive Research Forum and

Stanford Research Institute, important factors (including usable fingerprints) that

indicated case outcome were successfully discovered. According to a British research,

forensic laboratories helped the police in fewer than 40% of cases with no suspects,

approximately 7 percent of situations where a suspect had been named, and about 75

percent of cases where one had been identified (Idhiarhi, 2018a).

On the other hand, research on the use of evidence in court is relatively well

documented. According to a study of jury behavior, most juries adhered to the testimony

given and rendered decisions that were the same as those of the judges. They also noted

how infrequently witnesses with scientific expertise testified in court. In contrast to the

uncommon (25%) use of scientific evidence by prosecutors in capital cases considered by

the Illinois Supreme Court, an analysis of court files revealed a substantial reliance on

confessions and witness testimony to win convictions (Nutter, 2019).

In the United States, the National Institute of Justice provided funding for the

most thorough studies on the use of scientific evidence in case investigation and decision-

making in the 1980s. The first, forensic evidence and the police, looked at nearly 2,700

randomly chosen cases from four different jurisdictions around the country, 1,600 of

which had physical evidence that had been reviewed, and 1,100 similarly comparable

cases in which no physical evidence had been gathered (Stern et al., 2019). Case files

were taken from police department, crime lab, prosecutor, and court files and categorized

by offense category (homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and burglary). This

study revealed that only 20–30% of all significant crimes involved the collection and
 10

analysis of physical evidence (Stern, Angel, Cavanaugh, Zhu, & Lai, 2018; Thompson et

al. 2017).

Further, by type of crime, this rate varied considerably. For instance, the police

gathered physical evidence in nearly all murder, drug, and rape cases, as well as in 75%

of those involving rape, but only in 10-20% of attempted murders, 33% of break-ins, and

20% of robberies. Blood, hair, firearms, and fingerprints were the primary physical

evidence types that were gathered and evaluated in the lab the most, excluding banned

substances, which accounted for 70% or more of caseloads in the lab. On the list of

physical evidence gathered in cases of sexual assault was suspected semen, but its value

depended on the offender and victim's prior relationships. Investigations into violent

crimes often gathered more and more different types of physical evidence than

investigations into property crimes (Jenzen-Jones & Schroeder, 2018; Stern et al., 2019).

Clearance rates of offenses involving scientifically analyzed evidence were

roughly three times higher than in situations where such evidence was not used, even

after controlling for the availability of suspects, witnesses to the crime, and the amount of

time between the discovery of the offense and its report to the police. Furthermore, the

instances with suspects neither in prison nor recognized at the preliminary inquiry stage,

which typically had the lowest solution rates, tended to be those in which the forensic

evidence had the largest impact (Nutter, 2019).

The evaluation of forensic science's worth is a complicated and multifaceted

process. Not enough attention has been given to the contributions of forensic science, the

role of evidence in case processing, and their implications on the criminal justice system.

The study that has been done so far on the use of forensic science in the criminal justice
 11

system, however, indicates that it has a lot of potential. As evidence progresses through

the criminal justice system, perceptions of value change. Too frequently, the costs of

providing forensic science (such as the cost per test) are the only thing that are

considered. The effectiveness of investigations and the applications of forensic science

are examined in a variety of literary works, but they frequently have a very narrow scope

of value and depend on the organization they are attached to (such as a police force,

forensic service provider, or governmental body). In appraising forensic science,

effectiveness and efficiency are crucial, but value assessment encompasses much more

than just cost analyses (Inyang & Goodwil, 2020).

In order to ensure the scientific objectivity and efficiency that must guide the

process of gathering, analyzing, interpreting, and reporting forensic evidence, the debate

in forensic science focuses on issues such as standardization, accreditation, and de-

contextualization, in a legal and economical context (Idhiarhi, 2018b). Despite evidence

of its immense potential in several scenarios and research, it is acknowledged that

forensic case data is currently only minimally incorporated into the investigation and

crime analysis processes. Accepting an expanded role for forensic science that extends

beyond the provision of evidence for the court requires a mental shift. A long-term,

intense modelling activity of the investigative and crime analysis process that crosses the

borders of other disciplines has been started in order to encourage and direct this

development. The capital accumulated that may be used systematically is demonstrated

by instances in a framework that fully integrates forensic case data(Mathuva, 2018).

 12

The above cited literatures provided a clearer perspective of the study in terms of

comparison and contrast; it has important bearings in determining the relevance of

forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan City.

Theoretical Framework

The study can be viewed through the lenses of the three theories in digital

forensics. The three digital forensics theories—Cohen's Theory (2013), Carrier's Theory

(2006), and Gladyshev's Theory (2004)—can be used to analyze the study. According to

Cohen (2013), the examiner starts with a bag of bits and uses specific criteria to deduce

the meaning at a higher layer (these bits are a JPEG file). Between (low level) primitive

categories and (high level) sophisticated categories, Carrier (2006) makes a distinction.

He contends that inquiries are typically conducted at the complex level, with the

primitive level acting as the complex level's theoretical foundation. Remarks on complex

categories can, if necessary, be translated to primitive categories and then analyzed at the

primitive level. The understanding that this is a possibility, as opposed to an operational

practice that is occasionally used, is what matters. Gladyshev (2004) makes the

observation that programs can be mapped to finite states and then works at the lower

level, without further examining the connections between levels.

 13

Conceptual Framework

Variable
RELEVANCE OF
FORENSIC RESULT AS
COURT EVIDENCE IN
KIDAPAWAN CITY
-Admissibility of forensic
evidence
-Weight of forensic evidence

Moderator Variable

- Sex
- Age
- Length of Service

Figure 1. The Schematic Diagram of the Study

 14

Hypothesis

The formulated null hypothesis was tested at 0.05 level of significance stated as

follow:

Ho: There is no significant difference in the level of relevance of forensic result as

court evidence in Kidapawan City when analyzed according to respondents’ demographic

Profile?
 15

.
CHAPTER II

METHODS

This chapter discussed and included the research design, locale of the study,

sample design/sampling technique, instrumentation, validity and reliability of instrument,

data gathering procedure, and statistical tools and treatment of data.

Research Design

This study used the quantitative descriptive survey research design to obtain the

desired data of the study. The quantitative method is an empirical investigation involving

collection of information and analyzes the data collected. This is done with statistics,

particularly in the descriptive survey research design wherein the assessment of the

respondents is compared and determines the significant differences. Descriptive survey

is design to depict the participants in an accurate way, simpler put descriptive research is

all about describing about a specific topic (Kowalczy, 2015). This research designed was

appropriate in determining therelevance of forensic result as court evidence in

Kidapawan City.

Locale and Respondents of the Study

The respondents of the study were the forensic expert examiners of Region XII

from Kidapawan City including members of Scene of the Crime Operatives, whose role

is to gather and examine evidences that can be presented in the court to reinforce the case

and contribute to resolve the said case. Kidapawan is a component city in the landlocked

province of Cotabato. It serves as the provincial capital. The city has a land area of

358.47 square kilometers or 138.41 square miles which constitutes 3.85% of Cotabato's
 16

total area. Its population as determined by the 2020 Census was 160,791. This

represented 10.79% of

Figure 2. Map of the Philippines and Kidapawan City

 17

The total population of Cotabato province, or 3.28% of the overall population of the

SOCCSKSARGEN region. Based on these figures, the population density is computed at

449 inhabitants per square kilometer or 1,162 inhabitants per square mile.

Sample Design/Sampling Technique

The respondents of the study were the forensic expert examiners and personnel of

Scene of Crime Operatives (SOCO) in Kidapawan City. The study chooses only the

available and willing forensic expert examiners as respondents of the study. The

researchers took 12 respondents from the PNP personnel who are forensic expert

examiners and SOCO personnel. Convenience sampling technique was employed in the

study. A convenience sample is a type of sampling method where the sample is taken

from a group of people easy to contact or to reach. There are no other criteria to the

sampling method except that people be available and willing to participate. In addition,

this type of sampling method does not require that a simple random sample is generated,

since the only criterion is whether the participants agree to participate (Christensen and

Johnson, 2012).

Instrumentation

The questionnaire utilized in the study was adapted from a previous study

conducted byInyang and Goodwil (2020). The first part of the questionnaire was all about

the profile of the respondents consisting of gender, age, and length of service. The second

part of the questionnaire was all about therelevance of forensic result as court evidence in

Kidapawan City, which was measured through the indicatorsadmissibility of forensic

evidence and weight of forensic evidence.

 18

The said variable of the study was rated utilizing the 5-level Likert Scaling

System as follow:

Range of Description Interpretation

Mean

4.20-5.00 Very High The respondents strongly agree therelevance of forensic

result as court evidence in Kidapawan City.

3.40-4.19 High The respondents agree therelevance of forensic result as

court evidence in Kidapawan City.

2.60-3.39 Moderate The respondents moderately agree therelevance of

forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan City.

1.80-2.59 Low The respondents disagree therelevance of forensic

result as court evidence in Kidapawan City.

1.00-1.79 Very Low The respondents strongly disagree therelevance of

forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan City.

Validity and Reliability of Instrument

The preliminary draft adapted questionnaire from the study of Inyang and

Goodwil (2020)was forwarded to the research adviser for corrections and suggestions,

after which it was submitted to the panel of experts to be validated and determine if its

reliable or not. To strengthen its validity and reliability, the researchers conducted pilot

testing among 10 PNP forensicexaminer not included in the actual study and subjected

the data to Cronbach Alpha computation, wherein it yielded .896, indicating that it is

valid and reliable.

Design and Procedure

The first step in conducting the study was to prepare a letter addressed to the

heads, asking permission to conduct a survey among the Forensic examiners and SOCO

personnel in Kidapawan City, duly Noted by CCJE Dean of Notre Dame of Midsayap
 19

College, Melvie F. Bayog, Ph.D. Once request is granted, the researchers proceeded to

administer the questionnaires to the respondents and explain the reason why the study is

being conducted; also, assisted the respondents in answering the questionnaire without

influencing them in the choice of their answers. The answered questionnaires were

retrieved and tallied by the researchers then submit it to the school statistician for

statistical treatment of the data. The computed result was tabulated and then analyzed and

interpreted in the succeeding pages.

Statistical Tools and Treatment of Data

The statistical tools utilized in the treatment of the data include frequency count

and percentage, which were used in determining the exact number and percentile of the

respondents; Mean was used to determine the level of the relevance of forensic result as

court evidence in Kidapawan City; Mann-Whitney U was used in determining the

significant difference on the relevance of forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan

City when analyzed by gender; and, Kruskal Wallis was utilized in determining the

significant difference on the relevance of forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan

City when analyzed by age and length of service.

 20

CHAPTER III

RESULTS

This chapter presented the results of the study interpreted and discussed according

to the following subheadings: Profile of the Respondents; Relevance of Forensic Result

as Court Evidence in Kidapawan City; Significant Difference in the Relevance of

Forensic Result as Court Evidence in Kidapawan City when Analyzed by Age;

Significant Difference in the Relevance of Forensic Result as Court Evidence in

Kidapawan City when Analyzed by Sex; Significant Difference in the Relevance of

Forensic Result as Court Evidence in Kidapawan City when Analyzed by Length of

Service.

Profile of the Respondents

Table 1 depicted the profile of the respondents consisting of age, sex, and length

of service. When it comes to age, out of 12, 6 (50%) respondents are within the age

bracket of 31-40; 3 (25%) are within the age bracket of 41-50, and another 3 (25%)

coming from the age bracket is51 and above; in terms of gender, out of 12, 11 (91.7%)

forensic personnel are males and only 1 female (8.3%); while in terms of length of

service, out of 12 respondents 6 (50%) have been in their job as forensic officers from 1

to 5 years; 3 (25%) respondents have been in the service from 6 to 10 years; 2 (16.7%)

respondents work for 11 to 15 years; while, only 1 (8.3%) works for more than 16 years.

This means that majority of the forensic officers taken as respondents of the study are
 21

within the age bracket of 31 to 40; males, and has been in the service from 1 year to 5

years.

Table 1. Profile of the Respondents

Demographics Frequency Percentage
Age
31-40 6 50
41-50 3 25
51 and above 3 25
Total 12 100
Gender
Male 11 91.7
Female 1 8.3
Total 12 100
Length of Service
1-5 Years 6 50
6-10 Years 3 25
11-15 years 2 16.7
16 and above 1 8.3
Total 12 100

Level of Relevance of Forensic Result as Court Evidence in Kidapawan City

Table 2 displays the level of relevance of forensic result as court evidence in

Kidapawan City labelled as high (Mean=4.09; SD=0.859) classified as having clustered

responses from the respondents, considering the fact that it did not exceed 1.0. This

means that forensic results presented as court evidence is highly relevant to the litigation.

The result is in accordance with the statement of Edmond et al. (2019) accentuating that

investigator gathers all the evidence discovered at the crime scene, including fingerprints,

blood and other bodily fluids, hair, and any weapons that might have been used in the

crime and after processing in the forensic laboratory might be very important in the court.

The indicator admissibility of forensic evidence was very highly (Mean=4.35;

SD=.688) assessed by the respondents indicating clustered answers. They claimed it to be

 22

very highly relevant based on the three highest mean scores of the statements such as

expert testimonies are used in criminal and civil proceedings (Mean=5.00; SD=.000),

nothing is done to take the judge’ attention from the main issue (Mean=4.83; SD=.577),

and pictures

Table 2. Level of Relevance of Forensic Result as Court Evidence in Kidapawan City

Items Mean SD Descriptive
Level
Admissibility of Forensic Evidence 4.35 .688 Very High
1. Expert testimony are used in criminal and civil proceedings 5.00 .000 Very High
2. Stolen and injury inflicting items are tendered in court 4.42 .514 Very High
3. Pictures and videos are used to show how and where crime
was committed. 4.67 .492 Very High
4. Written confessions and agreements are tendered in court 4.33 .887 Very High
5. In all the trials witnessed, the Judge has never been outraged 4.00 .852 High
6. I have never witnessed any trial where a good thing is overly
emphasized 3.33 .778 High
7. Nothing is done to take the Judge’ attention from the main 4.83 .577 Very High
issue
8. Other witness testimonies are accepted only when they are
relevant and reliable 4.58 .514 Very High
9. Non-experts are never allowed to testify as an expert witness 4.50 .797 Very High
10. Defendant’s personality trait is used to support evidence
only when they are relevant and reliable 4.08 1.164 High
11. Information from privilege sources are rejected when
tendered in court 4.08 .996 High
Weight of Forensic Evidence 3.83 1.030 High
1. Defendants are convicted only when the crimes mentioned in
the testimonies are committed beyond a reasonable doubt 5.00 .000 Very High
2. The Judge ensures that the stolen and injury-inflicted items
are exactly the ones recovered from the defendants 4.58 .514 Very High
3. The pictures and videos actually display how and where the
defendants committed the crime 4.67 .492 Very High
4. Defendants are convicted only when tendered confessions
and agreements are actually written by them 4.25 .753 Very High
5. Nothing prejudicial has ever been presented before the Judge 4.58 .668 Very High
6. No good thing has ever been overly emphasized during trial
sessions 3.67 1.230 High
7. Deviation from the main issue does not occur during trial
sessions 4.25 1.055 Very High
8. Believable and persuasive hear-says are used to convict
defendants 2.75 1.912 Moderate
9. All the testimonies come from experts 1.92 1.240 Low
 23

10. Only relevant and reliable personality traits are used as

evidence 2.83 1.642 Moderate
11. The Judge uses only privilege information from independent
sources 3.67 1.825 High
Overall Mean 4.09 0.859 High

and videos are used to show how and where crime was committed. This means that

forensic evidence is very highly admissible as evidence in the court and could be the

basis of the verdict to close the case. The result confirmed the statement of Ballou (2019)

who emphasized that scientific evidence played a much larger role in sentencing

decisions than in decisions about whether to convict a defendant. Lab results were the

only sort of evidence that had any bearing on the sentence's length, and they typically

increased the likelihood of incarceration.

Ther indicator weight of forensic evidence was gauged high (Mean=3.83; SD=

1.030) and manifested the spread-out responses of the respondents. Although high in

level, the statements that best reinforce the indicator very highly claimed that defendants

are convicted only when the crimes mentioned in the testimonies are committed beyond

reasonable doubt(Mean=5.00; SD=.000),the pictures and videos actually display how

and where the defendants committed the crime (Mean=4.67; SD=.492), and the Judge

ensures that the stolen and injury-inflicted items are exactly the ones recovered from the

defendants(Mean=4.58; SD=.514). This means that the weight of forensic evidence in the

court is high indicating its influence in the decision of the judge. The finding supports the

statement of Almirall et al. (2017) elucidating that the reinforcement of forensic evidence

would make the case stronger and most likely would end up in a conviction of the

suspect.
 24

Significant Difference in the Relevance of Forensic Result as Court

Evidence in Kidapawan City when Analyzed by Age

Table 4 shows the analysis on the significant difference in the relevance of

forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan City when analyzed by age. Using

Kruskal Wallis as the statistical tool, computation disclosed a chi-square value of 1.043

with the degree of

Table 3.Significant Difference in the Relevance of Forensic Result as Court Evidence in

Kidapawan City when Analyzed by Age
Chi-Square df p-value Decision on Ho

1.043 2 0.594 Accept

p>0.05

freedom of 2 and p-value of 0.594, which when compared to the level of significance of

0.05 found to be greater hence, the acceptance of the null hypothesis. This means that

respondents within the age bracket of 31-40, 41-50, and 51 and above displayed parity on

their assessment of the relevance of forensic result as court evidence. It could be

surmised therefore that there is no significant difference in the relevance of forensic result

as court evidence in Kidapawan City when analyzed by age.

Significant Difference in the Relevance of Forensic Result as Court

Evidence in Kidapawan City when Analyzed by Sex

Table 1 shows the analysis on the significant difference in the relevance of

forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan City when analyzed by sex. Utilizing

Mann-Whitney U as statistical tool, the computation yielded a Mann-Whitney U value of

4.500 with Wilcoxon W value of 70.500 and Z value of -.291, while the p-value is 0.771,

which when compared to 0.05 level of significance disclosed no significant difference,

 25

thereby accepting the null hypothesis. This means that male and female forensic officers

of Kidapawan City shared an almost the same level of assessment of the relevance of

forensic result as court evidenceconsidering the fact that the only female forensic officer

viewed forensic result the same with the male forensic officers. This implies that there is

no significant difference in the relevance of forensic result as court evidence in

Kidapawan City when analyzed by sex.

Table 4.Significant Difference in the Relevance of Forensic Result as Court Evidence in

Kidapawan City when Analyzed by Sex
Mann- Wilcoxon W Z p-value Decision on Ho
Whitney U
4.500 70.500 -.291 0.771 Accept

p>0.05

Significant Difference in the Relevance of Forensic Result as Court Evidencein

Kidapawan City when Analyzed by Length of Service

Table 5 manifested the analysis on the significant difference in the relevance of

forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan City when analyzed by length of service.

Using Kruskal Wallis as statistical tool, the computation yielded a chi-square value of

1.210 with the degree of freedom of 3 and a p-value of 0.751, which when compared with

the level of significance of 0.05 disclosed no significant difference resulting to the

acceptance of the null hypothesis. This means that respondents who have been working

for 1 to 5 years, 6 to 10 years, 11 to 15 years and 16 and above years displayed an almost

the same level of assessment of the relevance of forensic result as court evidence. It could

be declared therefore that there is no significant difference in the relevance of forensic

result as court evidence in Kidapawan City when analyzed by length of service.

 26

Table 5. Significant Difference in the Relevance of Forensic Result as Court Evidence

in Kidapawan City when Analyzed by Length of Service
Chi-Square Df p-value Decision on Ho

1.210 3 0.751 Accept

 27

CHAPTER IV

DISCUSSION

Presented in this chapter are the discussion of the result of the study in terms of

findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

Findings

The study determined the level of relevance of forensic result as court evidence in

Kidapawan City. Specifically, it provided answers to the questions concerning the

demographic profile of the respondents in terms ofsex, age, and length of service. It also

covered the level of relevance of forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan City in

terms ofadmissibility of forensic evidence and weight of forensic evidence’ and,

concerning significant difference in the level of relevance of forensic result as court

evidence in Kidapawan City when analyzed according to respondents’ demographic

profile was also given top consideration.

The findings of the study are summarized as follows:

1. Majority of the forensic officers taken as respondents of the study are within

the age bracket of 31 to 40; males and has been in the service from 1 year to 5 years.

2. The level of relevance of forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan City

was labeled as high. The indicatoradmissibility of forensic evidence was described as

very high while the indicator weight of forensic evidence was gauged high.

3. There was no significant difference in the relevance of forensic result as court

evidence in Kidapawan City when analyzed by age, sex, and length of service.
 28

Conclusions

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn:

1. Forensic officers taken as respondents are mostly within the age bracket 31 to

40, male forensic officers and working from 1 to 5 years.

2. The level of relevance of forensic result as court evidence in Kidapawan City is

high.

3. There is no significant difference in the relevance of forensic result as court

evidence in Kidapawan City when analyzed by age, sex, and length of service.
 29

Recommendations

Based on the conclusions, the following recommendations are offered:

1. The legislators may pass a bill about specific forensic evidences that must be

acceptable in the court that should be endorsed by a certified and trusted forensic

examiner; thus, eyewitnesses’ testimony should be corroborated by forensic facts.

2.The forensic personnel may do their job diligently and with accuracy

considering that in the court’s decision, sending the wrong person in prison is not morally

right; while on the other hand, the conviction of the real culprit would bring justice to the

victim when the accurate forensic fact is presented.

3.The Philippine National Police investigators must preserve the scene of the

crime and prevent other officers and people from messing the crime scene so that Scene

of the Crime Operatives may gather the necessary evidences for the forensic examiners,

this is emphasized theoretically but not followed in practice.

4. The Criminology students should take evidences seriously as future law

enforcers and uphold the law by going after the real perpetrators of crime, and use

evidences to determine the real criminal.

5. The future researchers may conduct another study, particularly incorporating

Automated Fingerprint Identification Systems (AFIS) in the airport security system for

the inbound and outbound passengers.

 30

References

Almirall, J., Arkes, H., Lentini, J., Mowrer, F., &Pawliszyn, J. (2017). Forensic science
assessments: A qualityand gap analysis- fire investigation. American Association
for the Advancement of Science, Washington D.C.

Ballantyne, K.& Wilson-Wilde, L. (2020). Assessing the reliability and validity of

forensic science – an industry perspective. Australian Journal of Forensic
Sciences, 52(1), 1-7.

Ballou S. (2019). The NAS report: Ten years of response. Journal of Forensic Sciences,
64(1), 6–9. doi:10.1111/jfo.2019.64.issue-1.

Carrier, B. (2006). A Hypothesis-based approach to digital forensic investigations.

CERIAS Technical Report 2006-06, Center for Education and Research in
Information Assurance and Security, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana,
2006.

Cohen, F. (2013). Digital forensic evidence examination. Fred Cohen and Associates,
Livermore, California.
Christensen, B. and Johnson, L. (2012). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE Publication.

Dhabal, S., Nandi, K., Sen, D.J., & Saha, D. (2022). Ballistics: The projectile
characteristics of weapon in forensic science. World Journal of Pharmaceutical
and Life Sciences.

Edmond, G., Cunliffe, E., Martire, K., &San Roque, M. (2019). Forensic science
evidence and the limits ofcross-examination. Melbourne University Law Review,
42(3), 858–920.

Gladyshev, P. (2004). Formalizing event reconstruction in digital investigations. Doctoral

Dissertation, Department of Computer Science, University College Dublin,
Dublin, Ireland, 2004.

Idhiarhi, S. E. (2018a). Admissibility and evaluation of electronically generated evidence:

Practice and procedure. Practice Notes on the Evaluation of Evidence, 1-32.
Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324877394

Idhiarhi, S. E. (2018b). Forensic evidence: Admissibility weight and

mattersmiscellaneous. A paper presented at a Workshop of the Association of
Forensic Professionals of Nigeria with the theme. The role of Forensic Science
Experts in Criminal Investigation.
 31

Inyang, W. S. &Goodwil, G. F. (2020). Forensic evidence: How does admissibility

influence weight in the law of evidence? International Journal of Business,
Economics and Law, 21(5),
https://www.ijbel.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/IJBEL21_237.PDF

Jenzen-Jones, N.R. & Schroeder, M. (2018). An introductory guide to the identification of

small arms, light weapons, and associated ammunition.Retrieved from
https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/resource/introductory-guide-identification-
small-arms-light-weapons-and-associated-ammunition

Koehler J. (2018). How trial judges should think about forensic science evidence.
Judicature. Northwestern Public Law Research Paper 18–07,28–38.

Kowalczyk, D. (2017). Types of research. research associates. Retrieved from

https://study.com/academy/lesson/basic-research-and-applied-research-
definitions-and-differences.html

Mathuva, D. (2018). Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Kenya: Forensic audit

and investigations, litigationsupport – analysis and presentation of findings for
court cases.Strathmore University Business School. Retrieved
fromhttps://www.icpak.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/001-_-Forensic-Audit-
and-Investigations_-Dr.-Mathuva.pdf

National Institute of Standards and Technology (2020). The organization of scientific

area committees for forensic science. Retrieved
from://www.nist.gov/topics/organization-scientific-area-committees-forensic-
science

Nutter, P. W. (2019). Machine learning evidence: Admissibility and weight. Journal of

Constitutional Law, 23(3), 919-958.

Smith, J. (2022). Forensic ballistics and firearm identification: An overview. Journal of

Forensic Biomechanics, 13(1), 392.

Stern, H. S., Angel, M., Cavanaugh, M., Zhu, S. and Lai, E. L. (2018) Assessing the
complexity of handwritten signatures. Law, Probability and Risk, 17(2), 123–132

Stern, H.S., Cuellar, M., &Kaye, D. (2019). Reliability and validity of forensic science
evidence. Significance.https://rss.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/
j.1740-9713.2019.01250.x

Thompson, W., Black, J., Jain, A., &Kadane, J. (2017). Forensic science gap assessments:
A quality and gapanalysis - latent fingerprint examination. American Association
for the Advancement of Science, Washington D.C.
 32

Wilson-Wilde L. (2016). The future of the National Institute of Forensic Science -

implications forAustralia and New Zealand. Australian Journal of Forensic
Sciences, 49(1), 1–9. doi:10.1080/00450618.2016.1253773.

Wilson-Wilde L. (2018). The international development of forensic science standards - A

review.Forensic Science International, 288(1), 1–9.
doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.04.009.
 33

APPENDICES

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ON

RELEVANCE OF FORENSIC RESULT AS COURT EVIDENCE

IN KIDAPAWAN CITY

Dear Respondent,

The undersigned College of Criminal Justice Education students of the Notre

Dame of Midsayap College is presently conducting a research study on “RELEVANCE
OF FORENSIC RESULT AS COURT EVIDENCE IN KIDAPAWAN CITY.” The
main objective of the study is to determine the admissibility and weight of forensic
evidence in the court of law.

As CCJE students, the researchers would like to ask you to become one of the
respondents in this study; your reactions to each statement will serve as relevant data for
the completion of the study.

The researcher can assure you that all your answers would be treated with utmost
confidentiality.

The Researchers

Cosain, Alinor S.
Dela Cruz, Cee Jay D.
Kusin, Saimona B.

Part I: Demographic Profile

Name (Optional) ______________________________________________________

Gender: ( ) Male
( ) Female

Age: ( ) 21-30
( ) 31-40
( ) 41-50
( ) 50 and above

Length of Service: ( ) 1-5 years

( ) 6-10 years
( ) 11-15 years
( ) 16 years and above
 34

Part II. RELEVANCE OF FORENSIC RESULT AS COURT EVIDENCE IN

KIDAPAWAN CITY

Instruction: please put a check (√) mark which indicates your opinion on the following
questionnaire using the scale below.

5- Strongly agree
4- Agree
3- Moderate Agree
2- Disagree
1- Strongly Disagree

Admissibility of Forensic Evidence 5 4 3 2 1

1. Expert testimony are used in criminal and civil proceedings
2. Stolen and injury inflicting items are tendered in court
3. Pictures and videos are used to show how and where crime was
committed
4. Written confessions and agreements are tendered in court
5. In all the trials witnessed, the Jury has never been outraged
6. I have never witnessed any trial where a good thing is overly
emphasized
7. Nothing is done to take the Jury’s attention from the main issue
8. Other witness testimonies are accepted only when they are relevant
and reliable
9. Non-experts are never allowed to testify as an expert witness
10. Defendant’s personality trait is used to support evidence only
when they are relevant and reliable
11. Information from privilege sources are rejected when tendered in
court

Weight of Forensic Evidence 5 4 3 2 1

1. Defendants are convicted only when the crimes mentioned in the
testimonies are committed beyond a reasonable doubt
2. The Jury ensures that the stolen and injury-inflicted items are
exactly the ones recovered from the defendants
3. The pictures and videos actually display how and where the
defendants committed the crime
4. Defendants are convicted only when tendered confessions and
agreements are actually written by them
5. Nothing prejudicial has ever been presented before the Jury
6. No good thing has ever been overly emphasized during trial
sessions
7. Deviation from the main issue does not occur during trial sessions
8. Believable and persuasive hear-says are used to convict defendants
9. All the testimonies come from experts
 35

10. Only relevant and reliable personality traits are used as evidence
11. The Jury uses only privilege information from independent
sources
 36

Appendix D. Curriculum Vitae

CURICULUM VITAE
Personal Data
Name: Alinor S. Cosain
Address: Marabuhay Bao, Alamada, Cotabato
Date of Birth: April 10, 2002
Place of Birth: Marabuhay Bao, Alamada, Cotabato
Citizenship: Filipino
Gender: Male
Religious: Islam
Contact Number: 0912292430
Email Address: alinorcosain@gmail.com

Educational Attainment
Primary: Marabuhay Bao, Alamada, Cotabato
Secondary: Dilangalen Ntional High School
Tertiary: Notre Dame of Midsayap College

College Organization:
Junior Professional Association of the Philippine (JPCAP)
Muslim Student Organization (MSO)
 37

CURICULUM VITAE
Personal Data
Name: Cee Jay Dela Cruz
Address: Nalin 1, Midsayap, Cotabato
Date of Birth: May 18, 20001
Place of Birth: Patindeguen Midsayap, Cotabato
Citizenship: Filipino
Gender: Male
Religious: Catholic
Contact Number: 09557063389
Email Address: delacruzceejay@gmail.com

Educational Attainment
Primary: Dilangalen Central Elementary School
Secondary: St. Mary’s Academic of Midsayap Inc
Tertiary: Notre Dame of Midsayap College

College Organization: Junior Professional Association of the Philippine (JPCAP)

 38

CURICULUM VITAE
Personal Data
Name: Saimona B. Kusin
Address: Central Labas, Midsayap, Cotabato
Date of Birth: February 10, 2000
Place of Birth: Central Labas, Midsayap, Cotabato
Citizenship: Filipino
Gender: Female
Religious: Islam
Contact Number: 09306791315
Email Address: kusinsaimona@gmail.com

Educational Attainment
Primary: Upper Labas Elementary School
Secondary: Patendiguen High School
Tertiary: Notre Dame of Midsayap College

College Organization
Junior Professional Association of the Philippine (JPCAP)
Muslim Student Organization (MSO)