485 Forensic Law Midterm Exam
JUS 485 Midterm Exam
Answer the following questions, which are based upon the first four modules of the course.
1. Explain why it is that evidence gained through the forensic science process is almost always considered to be circumstantial evidence.
The most important fact that makes forensic evidence circumstantial is because science cannot be clearly defined by law. The legal system have created standards and written legal rules regarding the admissibility of forensic evidence. When forensic evidence that is presented in court is rarely unaccompanied by an expert witness to provide the court room with a professional explanation backing the reliability of the forensic process used to collect the relevant evidence. This is one the major obstacles in the modern courtroom. Expert witnesses are intended to provide the court with a detailed description of the forensic evidence being presented and how that evidence was analyzed through the use of forensic science. This makes an expert witness’s testimony a testimony to probability and circumstance, rather than actual fact. Consequently, the forensic evidence that is presented is ruled as circumstantial. The primary reason that science cannot be clearly defined by law is the rate of change and new theory that occurs regularly in science. There have been numerous cases where scientific evidence is found to be incorrect or inconclusive when it is admitted into evidence. This is a major concern for the courtroom as false convictions are detrimental to the integrity of the judicial system. Admissible forensic evidence is most always considered circumstantial so that there must be other forms of evidence to support the conclusion made from the forensic evidence to make a ruling.
2. Explain ways in which an opposing attorney can challenge an expert’s testimony in court.
The primary goal of an attorney during cross examination is to destroy the credibility of a witness’s testimony. Expert witnesses are
Answer the following questions, which are based upon the first four modules of the course.
1. Explain why it is that evidence gained through the forensic science process is almost always considered to be circumstantial evidence.
The most important fact that makes forensic evidence circumstantial is because science cannot be clearly defined by law. The legal system have created standards and written legal rules regarding the admissibility of forensic evidence. When forensic evidence that is presented in court is rarely unaccompanied by an expert witness to provide the court room with a professional explanation backing the reliability of the forensic process used to collect the relevant evidence. This is one the major obstacles in the modern courtroom. Expert witnesses are intended to provide the court with a detailed description of the forensic evidence being presented and how that evidence was analyzed through the use of forensic science. This makes an expert witness’s testimony a testimony to probability and circumstance, rather than actual fact. Consequently, the forensic evidence that is presented is ruled as circumstantial. The primary reason that science cannot be clearly defined by law is the rate of change and new theory that occurs regularly in science. There have been numerous cases where scientific evidence is found to be incorrect or inconclusive when it is admitted into evidence. This is a major concern for the courtroom as false convictions are detrimental to the integrity of the judicial system. Admissible forensic evidence is most always considered circumstantial so that there must be other forms of evidence to support the conclusion made from the forensic evidence to make a ruling.
2. Explain ways in which an opposing attorney can challenge an expert’s testimony in court.
The primary goal of an attorney during cross examination is to destroy the credibility of a witness’s testimony. Expert witnesses are