AC 1.3- Explain how evidence is processed. [6 marks]
Evidence is used to establish proof that a crime was committed or that a
particular person committed that crime and will prove an offender’s guilt or
innocence. Therefore, it is important that the collection, transfer, and
preservation of evidence is done properly. Physical evidence and testimonial
evidence are two of the most important. Physical evidence is physical material
such as: DNA, weapons or stolen goods recovered from the suspect.
Testimonial evidence is written or given orally by the victims, defendants,
eyewitnesses, or expert witnesses.
PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
Physical evidence is the type of evidence that must be collected, transferred,
and preserved correctly, failure to do this can make the evidence inadmissible
in court no matter the persuasiveness of that evidence. It is a key part of
prosecutions and court cases, this could be due to Locard’s (French
criminologist) ‘exchange principle’, who said that every contact leaves a trace
behind, meaning that whatever contact the offender has made with either the
environment or the victim will leave a trace. And so every crime scene works to
find physical evidence, believing some was left behind. However, this exchange
can cause issues during criminal cases, as seen in the case of Amanda Knox and
Meredith Kercher, Kercher a 21-year-old student from Coulsdon, Surrey, was
killed in her home in the university town of Perugia in November 2007. Her
body was discovered in her bedroom, partially undressed, and stabbed many
times. She had also been sexually assaulted. CSI who collected the genetic
evidence used to convict Amanda Knox of the murder, made glaring errors,
including using a dirty glove and not wearing caps. Considering these CSI are
experts, it could be argued as to why they had made such a careless mistake
and lacked expertise. Compared to the huge amount of evidence that
connected Guede to the crime, the amount of evidence connecting Knox to it
was tiny, but it was enough to persuade a jury of their guilt. However, forensic
experts examined the DNA evidence more closely at the retrial and concluded
that it was contaminated. This links in with what Paul Kirk had said, that
evidence cannot be wrong or wholly absent, and only human failure to find it,
study it and understand it can diminish its value.
Evidence is used to establish proof that a crime was committed or that a
particular person committed that crime and will prove an offender’s guilt or
innocence. Therefore, it is important that the collection, transfer, and
preservation of evidence is done properly. Physical evidence and testimonial
evidence are two of the most important. Physical evidence is physical material
such as: DNA, weapons or stolen goods recovered from the suspect.
Testimonial evidence is written or given orally by the victims, defendants,
eyewitnesses, or expert witnesses.
PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
Physical evidence is the type of evidence that must be collected, transferred,
and preserved correctly, failure to do this can make the evidence inadmissible
in court no matter the persuasiveness of that evidence. It is a key part of
prosecutions and court cases, this could be due to Locard’s (French
criminologist) ‘exchange principle’, who said that every contact leaves a trace
behind, meaning that whatever contact the offender has made with either the
environment or the victim will leave a trace. And so every crime scene works to
find physical evidence, believing some was left behind. However, this exchange
can cause issues during criminal cases, as seen in the case of Amanda Knox and
Meredith Kercher, Kercher a 21-year-old student from Coulsdon, Surrey, was
killed in her home in the university town of Perugia in November 2007. Her
body was discovered in her bedroom, partially undressed, and stabbed many
times. She had also been sexually assaulted. CSI who collected the genetic
evidence used to convict Amanda Knox of the murder, made glaring errors,
including using a dirty glove and not wearing caps. Considering these CSI are
experts, it could be argued as to why they had made such a careless mistake
and lacked expertise. Compared to the huge amount of evidence that
connected Guede to the crime, the amount of evidence connecting Knox to it
was tiny, but it was enough to persuade a jury of their guilt. However, forensic
experts examined the DNA evidence more closely at the retrial and concluded
that it was contaminated. This links in with what Paul Kirk had said, that
evidence cannot be wrong or wholly absent, and only human failure to find it,
study it and understand it can diminish its value.
