IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES: ADDRESSING THE RELIABILITY OF NEW SCIENCES

Abstract Since the 1930s police and courts all over the world are using the scientific techniques in solving crime and achieving justice. In the past few decades there have been remarkable advancements in the growth of forensic (crime) laboratories serving the criminal justice system and in the sophistication of scientific techniques employed to examine and interpret physical clues. Today, the police and courts have increased their reliance on more objective forms of evidence, scientific breakthrough in such fields as DNA testing that uniquely determine the source of biological substances. In spite of these advancements and growth of forensic science services, little published work exists on the uses and effects of forensic science evidence. In criminal cases, there have been challenges on sufficiency grounds and concerns over the use of forensic evidence as the sole or primary proof of guilt. Even uncorroborated DNA matching might not be enough to satisfy the burden of establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The reliability of forensic DNA testing results might be questioned for any number of reasons, e.g., laboratory error, cross-contamination, interpretive bias or fraud, etc. In this context, more studies are needed to assess the contribution of such advancements on the role and impact of scientific evidence in criminal case processing.