Forensic Science – Science as applied to a court of law
On May the 14th all the first, second and third years journalism students were given the fantastic opportunity to spend several hours with Nigel Hodge, consultant forensic scientist, who explained, discussed and encouraged everyone to ask as many questions we could think of having to do with forensic science. The scientists are experts in different areas, and Nigel’s expertise is within DNA profiling, blood pattern analysis and crime scene investigation.
Nigel explained that as a forensic scientist you do not examine evidence with the main goal to decide whether the suspected is innocent or not, you investigate and critically value the evidence with one single purpose, to make sure they are or are not strong enough for a court hearing, and report their findings to the court. Their job is not, what many might think, to challenge things – this is up to the defence.
Within our society today, forensic scientists work privately – so just like lawyers they compete for clients and contracts with other private science companies. Nigel added that you will find that the police work with forensic science, but this seems to be more of a fashion thing (to have a forensic science laboratory within the police station) as most of them do not actually acquire a degree in any kind of science whatsoever.
“To give evidence is quite fun ... my job is to get the evidence across”
If the evidence that the scientist has put forward to the court gets questioned, the scientist him/herself will act as a witness in court. To be able to focus on the evidence without being biased, Nigel explains that you have to stay impartial, and his way of doing this is never to meet with his clients, not see any photos, not forming any kind of opinion about them, as this will make it harder to focus on the solid evidence in front of you.
“My duty is the truth”
DNA (Deoxyribonucleic acid) profiling has been used since 1986 and it got its big breakthrough in the Colin Pitchfork case. Since then DNA profiling has developed immensely and it still does, every day as technology moves forward faster than ever before. One of the most recent methods is called Low Copy Number DNA Profile (LCN) and Nigel explains it is a very good method to use as it is “incredibly sensitive”. Thanks to this we can pick up DNA from small, small amounts of material that have earlier been harder, if not impossible to find. But there is a downside – it is incredibly sensitive, which means the small amount of a given material might give us the DNA profile of the suspect – along with a hundred odd prints that has been touching the same area... It’s like finding a needle in a haystack.
Nigel also explained that to be able to reopen a case, if the convicted still pleads innocent, you have to be able to prove that there are new evidence for the trial, either evidence that has an importance to the case but have not been reviewed in court before, or evidence that due to new technology now can shed new light over already used evidence.
Once you are found guilty, you are legally guilty.
No matter how much time you spend on a certain case, looking at evidence from new angles, in a new light you will not find the answer unless you ask the right questions.
---
TIP: You might also find this interesting:
Proper orgasms to the people!!
Emotionally detached?
TIP: Why not check out:
Andrew Gidding's blog for more information on forensic science
James Kenyon's blog for information on Jeremy Webb, Editor in Chief, New Scientist
No comments:
Post a Comment