• Law -> Criminal Law and Justice

• 0 Comment

How reliable is forensic evidence in criminal trials?

Scarlet Kunat

Forensic evidence plays a significant role in the criminal justice system, and it is often regarded as the ultimate truth in the pursuit of justice. However, the reliability of forensic evidence has long been debated, and the use of such evidence in criminal trials has been under scrutiny.

Various factors affect the reliability of forensic evidence. The accuracy of forensic evidence relies on the ways and surroundings through which the evidence is collected, preserved and analyzed to ensure no contamination and chain-of-custody are upheld. The competence and training of the forensic personnel analysing and interpreting the evidence holding is crucial to ensuring reliability.

One of the most widely used methods of forensic analysis is DNA profiling. Despite being considered almost foolproof due to its ability to identify a match with traits or DNA evidence, errors in DNA analysis have been found to occur due to faults in lab practices, contamination of DNA samples or human interpretation errors.

Furthermore, the reliability of forensic evidence has been challenged in light of groundbreaking scientific discoveries and technological advancements. For example, the accuracy of bite mark analysis, once considered an infallible method of identification, has been challenged by DNA profiling analysis which has found similar bite mark patterns in different individuals.

False convictions due to the misuse of forensic evidence have contributed to the debate about the reliability of forensic evidence in criminal trials. Judges, juries and lawyers need to be aware of the risk of placing undue reliance on forensic evidence and should supplement forensic evidence by considering it as additional evidence. They need to be prepared to hear forensic evidence but not to rely solely on such evidence in making a conviction.

In conclusion, the reliability of forensic evidence in criminal trials depends on a wide range of factors, ranging from the collection and analysis of evidence, to the interpretation of scientific data by forensic scientists. The evolving nature of science, along with the potential for human error, means that the reliability of forensic evidence must always be subject to scrutiny and review. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the parties involved in the criminal justice system to weigh up the reliability of forensic evidence and to take a cautious approach to the over-reliance on such evidence in criminal trials.