Scientific facts that may make the case evident that a suspect is guilty. Duabert hearings are an example of Science Vs the Law, the fact that a person’s fingerprints, DNA and computerized transactions can prove them guilty. Duabert hearings make sure that the technique that is used by the forensics and Police is reliable and holds truth in the court of law. Some of the factors that are measured are 1. Is the theory or technique tested or a falsified concept 2. Has the technique been evaluated? 3. Is it a reliable technique or source of information 4. Is the technique a generally accepted procedure that produces relevant scientific facts?
Is it fair to subsequently make up a new procedure that has not been proven to incriminate a person suspected of a crime?
Let us take for instance you have a man who is walking along the street and he launches himself at a moving car. All scientific evidence would sagest that the driver is at fault. The scientific information will only tell the jury that the specific vehicle that was moving along the highway struck the man. The scientific information will not show that the man bluntly through himself out into the street to put himself at the will of the moving vehicle thus committing suicide. Any scientific data would go against the driver even though he is not at fault. Eyewitness testimony is the only valued testimony you could have simply because the driver of the vehicle was not at fault.
No comments:
Post a Comment