Is forensic evidence trustworthy?


8 Responses to “Is forensic evidence trustworthy?”

  1. Antinous / Moderator says:

    At least we’re moving away from relying on eyewitnesses, which isn’t much better than spectral evidence.

    • penguinchris says:

      Yes… I think it’s ultimately a positive trend. Right now the tech isn’t quite there (and the funding to do advanced analyses for every case is nonexistent) but the public (in the form of juries) demanding better and better evidence over time can only be a good thing IMO.

    • Stooge says:

      On the other hand, it’s far easier (and cheaper) to challenge dodgy eyewitness testimony than forensic evidence.

    • Ultan says:

       spectral evidence  – as in spectrographic  – evidence could be a lot better than eyewitness testimony. “Spectral” as in ghosts, not so much.

  2. Rob says:

    If you accept the fact that prosecutors are more interested in building cases than finding actually guilty people, it becomes advantageous to use what amounts to fake but convincing evidence to win.

    Houston has had 10 years or revelations about people faking DNA evidence… And by people I mean district attorneys and DNA labs.

  3. Guest says:

    Do you believe the evidence gathered by the state, or your own lying eyes?

Leave a Reply