Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Forensic Science

Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 38

FORENSIC SCIENCE – AN

INTRODUCTION TO
CRIMINALISTIC
What is Forensic Science?

The application of Science to those criminal and civil


laws that are enforced by law enforcement agencies in
a criminal justice system
Forensic Science is…

Applied Science
Often called Criminalistics
Forensic Science is the application of Scientific knowledge
to question of civil and criminal law.
This work is a lab-based, hands-on course that will explore
what forensic scientist do. Forensic methods and use
scientific methods to solve legal problems.
Forensic Science applies

Chemistry
Biology
Physics
Geology
Forensic Science and the Law

 The Forensic scientist must be methodical in his or her work.


 Forensic scientist solve problems using the following approach:
 1.Observe the crime scene or questioned evidence and collect
objective data.
 2.Consider hypothesis or possible solution to the problem based on
observation, given direction to the scene.
This step requires inductive reasoning,
experience, and imagination.
History and Development of Forensic Science
When in Rome…

 Forensic” comes from the Latin word “forensis” meaning forum.


 During the time of the Romans. A criminal charge meant presenting the case
before the public.(625 BC
 Both the person accused of the crime and the accuser would give speeches based
on their side of the story.
 The individual with the best argument would determine the outcome of the case.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

Mystery author in late 1800’s


Popularized scientific crime-detection
methods through his fictional character
“Sherlock Holmes”
Mathieu Orfila (1787-1853)

Father of Toxicology
Wrote about the detection of poisons and their
effects on animals.
Mathieu Orfila (1787-1853)

 Mathieu Orfila was a towering figure in the emergent field of forensics. Often
called the "Father of Toxicology," he was the first great 19th-century exponent of
forensic medicine. Orfila worked to make chemical analysis a routine part of
forensic medicine, and made studies of asphyxiation, the decomposition of
bodies, and exhumation
Mathieu Orfila (1787-1853)

He helped to develop tests for the presence of blood in a


forensic context and is credited as one of the first people to
use a microscope to assess blood and semen stains. He also
worked to improve public health systems and medical
training.
Alphonse Bertillon (1853-1914)

“Father of Anthropometry”
Developed a system to distinguish one
individual person from another based on
certain body measurements.
Francis Galton (1822-1911)

Father of Fingerprinting
Developed fingerprinting as a way to
uniquely identify individuals
.
Develop pattern in fingerprints and devising a classification
system that survives to this day. Introduced the 3 family
patterns namely Arc, LOOP and WHORL
Fingerprinting…
Leone Lattes (1887-1954)

“Father of Bloodstain Identification”


He developed a procedure for determining the blood
type (A, B , AB or O).
Calvin Goddard (1891 – 1955)

Father of Ballistics
Developed the technique to examine bullets
using a comparison microscope, to determine
whether or not a particular gun fired the bullets.
Albert Osborn (1858-1946)

“Father of Document Examination”


His work led to the acceptance of documents as
scientific evidence by the courts.
 His seminal book Questioned Documents was first published in 1910
and later heavily revised as a second edition in 1929. Other
publications, including The Problem of Proof (1922), The Mind of the
Juror (1937), and Questioned Document Problems (1944) were
widely acclaimed by both the legal profession and by public and
private laboratories concerned with matters involving questioned
documents.
Walter McCrone (1916-2002)

“Father of Microscopic Forensics”


He developed and applied his microscope techniques
to examine evidence in countless court cases.
Hairs, Fibers and etc…
Hans Gross (1847-1915)

Wrote the book on applying all the


different science disciplines to the field
of criminal investigation.
Edmond Locard (1877-1966)

 Locard’s Exchange Principle


 In 1910, he started the 1st crime lab in an attic of a police station in
Paris, France.
 With few tools, he quickly became known world-wide to forensic
scientist and criminal investigators and eventually founded the
Institute of Criminalistics in France.
Locard’s Exchange Principle

“Every Contact Leaves a Trace”


He believe that every criminal can be connected to crime by
particles carried from the crime scene.
When a criminal comes in contact with an object or person, a
cross transfer of evidence occurs.
J. Edgar Hoover

‘Father of the FBI’ Director of Federal Bureau of


Investigation during the 1930’s
Hoover’s leadership spanned 48 yrs and 8 presidential
administrations. His reign covered Prohibition, the Great
Depression, WWII. The Korean War, the Cold war. And the
Vietnam War.
J. Edgar Hoover

He organized a national laboratory to offer


forensic services to all law enforcement agencies
in the U.S
Application of Forensic Science

Application of DNA as evidence


Catastrophes and Wars
Body remains of victims(either civilian or
soldiers) ex. ( Holocaust )
Admissibility of Physical Evidence: Landmark
Cases

Frye vs. United States (1923), D.C. Circuit


Court.
Daubert vs. Dow Pharmaceutical, Inc.
(1993. US Supreme Court.
Facts…
 Frye (defendant) was charged with second-degree murder. At trial,
Frye’s counsel sought to introduce an expert who would testify as to a
“systolic blood pressure deception test” that the expert performed on
Frye. The test would allegedly show whether Frye was lying when he
testified because blood pressure allegedly rises when a person lies but
stays the same when the person told the truth. The trial court rejected
the testimony of the expert. Frye was convicted and appealed.
Frye vs. United States

The scientific principle must be sufficiently


established to have gained general acceptance in
the particular field in which it belongs.
Daubert vs. Dow Pharmaceutical, Inc. Facts of
the Case.

Petitioners, two minor children and their parents, alleged in


their suit against respondent that the children's serious birth
defects had been caused by the mothers' prenatal ingestion of
Bendectin, a prescription drug marketed by respondent.
 The District Court granted respondent summary judgment based on a
well-credentialed expert's affidavit concluding, upon reviewing the
extensive published scientific literature on the subject, that maternal
use of Bendectin has not been shown to be a risk factor for human
birth defects.
 Although petitioners had responded with the testimony of eight other
well-credentialed experts, who based their conclusion that Bendectin
can cause birth defects on animal studies, chemical structure analyses,
and the unpublished "reanalysis" of previously published human
statistical studies, the court determined that this evidence did not meet
the applicable "general acceptance" standard for the admission of
expert testimony.
The Court of Appeals agreed and affirmed, citing Frye v.
United States, 54 App. D. C. 46, 47, 293 F.1d 13, 1014, for
the rule that expert opinion based on a scientific technique is
inadmissible unless the technique is "generally accepted" as
reliable in the relevant scientific community .
Daubert vs. Dow Pharmaceutical, Inc.

The scientific principle must have general


acceptability to those who should be familiar
with its use in a laboratory.
End of Report.
Thank you!

You might also like