Forensics Residing in a City

Forensics

Residing in a city with one of the highest rates of violent crime leads to a variety of criminal situations that can be addressed with forensics. A recent event involving a shootout at a local gang site is one such scenario that could provide opportunities to use forensic evidence such as fingerprinting, ballistics, blood and DNA. In this scenario a young man was shot to death, but it was not certain who had done the shooting, or why. The physical evidence was initially sparse, but there were some clues, including the apparent murder weapon, left behind that could be used by an investigator.

A recent study determined that "in order to link a defendant to a crime, prosecutors have presented expert testimony on a variety of forensic techniques such as DNA analysis, fingerprint comparisons, toolmark comparisons, and bullet lead analysis" (Kaasa, Peterson, Morris, Thompson, 2006, pg. 433). The field of forensic evidence is constantly showing improvements in evidence gathering techniques and in the above scenario the importance of some of those techniques would become very apparent.

One of the most important pieces of evidence to be found on the scene was the gun that was used during the event. It was discovered in an adjacent field and could yield a number of key ingredients in building a case. Those key ingredients include the fact that ballistics tests can be run to determine if the pistol was the actual murder weapon. Additionally, the gun can be dusted for fingerprints as well as for any traces of DNA evidence that can be used to determine persons of interest who had handled the gun.

Fingerprinting has been proven as an effective form of gathering evidence and has been used in societies for much longer than many previously believed. One study shows, "fingerprint identification is thus an example of the strategic reorientation of much older techniques by occidental society" (Pollman, 2004, pg. 298). Science has shown that individuals have specific fingerprints and this has been used to validate evidence both for and against defendants for decades. A new technology has been introduced, however that makes fingerprinting secondary when evidence of DNA is available. Complementing fingerprinting analysis with DNA analysis provides a double whammy against the accused. An article in the Journal of Law espouses the fact that "in a little over twenty years, DNA evidence and the science and technology under-girding it have become highly valued instruments in solving crime, convicting criminals, and exonerating the innocent" (Noble, 2006, pg. 149). In this case, fingerprinting and DNA analysis can be used to establish the identity of the shooter.

Since it is important to keep track and ascertain the value of gathered evidence, it makes sense to classify such evidence as it is gathered. Evidence can be classified in a variety of manners, one way of doing so would be from the viewpoint of the prosecutor in the case. When described in this manner, the evidence can be classified in three separate categories. Those categories include; favorable evidence, neutral evidence and harmful evidence. Favorable evidence would be helpful to the prosecutor because it helps to establish motive and to bring about convictions regarding criminal activities.

Neutral evidence can be regarded as neither helpful not harmful to the prosecutor's case, and harmful evidence is evidence that makes the scene less likely in regards to the jury.

As the forensic investigator it is important therefore to bring to light as much helpful evidence as possible. This can be accomplished in part by recreating the crime scene. The ballistics helps by providing proof that the weapon was used during the commission of the murder by matching the bullets from the pistol to any bullets found in the body. The DNA and fingerprints matched to a particular suspect would provide verification that the suspect had handled the gun. It would also rule out any other suspects if no other DNA or fingerprints were found on the weapon. Last but not least would be any traces of blood found on the suspects clothing. Blood evidence is very powerful evidence since current technology allows for establishing identities through the analysis of blood that is very effective. George Schiro, a forensic scientist with the Louisiana State Police Crime Laboratory writes, "a blood source can now be statistically narrowed down to one person out of several million or even several billion" (Schiro). Most importantly, according to Schiro, blood evidence can eliminate prospective suspects while providing strong evidence in regards to establishing identities of other suspects. All four of the above mentioned evidence types can provide helpful evidence for the prosecutor(s) and often times are direct links to the defendant in regards to establishing crime scene scenarios and what took place during the particular event.

Concerning the case example used in this paper, the ballistics of the weapon showed that it was the weapon used during the murder, fingerprints (though no DNA) were found on the weapon that helped to establish the identity of the shooter, and blood spatters on the defendant's shoes were analyzed and it was determined that those blood spatters were from the victim. The suspect was identified by the fingerprint results, while the blood spatters tied him to the victim, and the ballistics tied the defendant to the weapon used during the crime. Profiling the victim and the accused showed enmity between them and the gangs that provided motive for the killing. Once the motive was established, the forensic investigator was allowed the opportunity to reconstruct the crime scene.