Module 9 Discussion

.docx

School

University of Florida *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

3114

Subject

Law

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by destyyyyy352 on coursehero.com

Module 9 Discussion Answer one of the following questions: 1. Read Manson v. Brathwaite (pgs. 364-369). Describe the basic facts and legal issue(s) of the case. Summarize the majority’s opinion in this case. Afterwards, watch the 60 Minutes episode “Eyewitness Testimony” Part I Links to an external site. & Part II. Links to an external site. Following, discuss the legal ramifications of the police use of eyewitness testimony. Was the court right or wrong regarding how an individual should be presented photographs of the subject? Should eyewitness testimony even be accepted as reliable evidence in a court of law? Does your answer to the last question matter based on the severity of the crime? Please refer to and cite applicable sections from the text in your answer. OR 2. Read the sections on “Scientific Identification” (pgs. 374-382). Describe the different types of scientific evidence that can be used to identify a subject and whether that method is acceptable or not. Afterwards, watch the Frontline episode “The Real CSI,” Links to an external site. and then summarize the facts of this film. Following, discuss based on your opinion whether the types of evidence discussed earlier should or should not be accepted in court. Did your opinion about these different methods change after watching the video? Please refer to and cite applicable sections from the text in your answer. The different types of scientific evidence that are used as methods to identify a subject. Those different types of scientific evidence include; fingerprinting, DNA, and even polygraph evidence. Some may argue that fingerprint evidence could be controversial due to the fact that there isn’t a scientific method on how it is conducted and when a match is found. DNA evidence however is considered accurate and it is highly used to identify subjects. DNA evidence could be saliva, blood, semen, and even skin analysis [Lippman 375.] On the other hand, polygraph evidence is not highly favored in a court of law. It is considered inadmissible into evidence due to the fact that it failed the Frye and Daubert tests for scientific evidence admission [Lippman 381.] The front line episode of “The Real CSI” was very entertaining as well as educational for me. This particular episode went through a series of cases that were related to scientific evidence as well as the methodology behind those cases. First it touched on fingerprint analysis and discussed how there was no specific scientific method that was used as well as no research to back up the methodology used in fingerprint analysis. One leading analyzer in the field even suggested that he takes a leap of faith once he thinks there is enough connecting to fingerprints, in other words he is stating that he is never completely certain when it comes down to fingerprint analysis. In the episode bite mark evidence was also discussed and it stated that there was virtually no science behind it. They mentioned
the Casey Anthony case, and they brought up different types of scientific evidence that was used in that case; even odor analysis. Again, they mentioned that there is really no scientific evidence that any of these methods used in forensic science is backed up by extensive research. The episode also touched on DNA evidence. DNA evidence is the only scientific evidence that is mostly known as accurate. Personally, my opinion on fingerprint analysis and scientific evidence definitely changed after reading the lecture material and watching this episode. I believe that more research needs to be put into the fingerprint analysis considering the fact that it is highly used today to solve major cases.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help