We depend upon facts to tell us what is right and wrong, but what happens when they are lies? Forensic evidence has the undeniable capacity to close cases; these facts are assumed infallibly true. As cited in “The Crimes of Crime Labs”, “If you put God on the witness stand . . . and God’s testimony conflicted with the DNA evidence, everyone would automatically say, ‘Why is God lying like this?’” This quote is the pinnacle of the issue: in a situation of opinion or belief versus science, who do you think wins?
Undue trust aside, behind science lie the imperfect human beings that find the sentence-sealing evidence. This ultimate trust is called the CSI Effect: the perception of the near-infallibility of forensic science in response to the TV show (DiFonzo 3). Popular culture therefore believes that forensic facts are indefinitely true. But, from accidental contamination to purposeful tampering, forensic evidence has its flaws. As stated in our textbook, unquestioned forensic evidence-based conclusions can lead to major scandals (Cole, Smith 401). Such is highlighted in June 2010 scandal of a Nebraskan crime scene investigator planting evidence, resulting in the conviction of two innocent men.
When justice is based off of falsified facts, is it just? And what do we trust?
Cole, George F., and Christopher E. Smith. Criminal Justice in America. Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2011. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment