In the United States, the death penalty and the question of executing innocent people has become a fundamental topic of discussion. Jay D. Aronson and Simon A. Cole propose that, “due to the certainty attached to DNA evidence in public discourse, it can be used as a lever with which to challenge law’s claims to truth-making authority, and to undermine public trust in the death penalty” (Aronson and Cole 603). Shlomit Avraham maintains that “the success of obtaining DNA profiles from touch DNA has opened up possibilities and led to the collection of DNA from a wider range of exhibits” (Avraham 793). How many people have been released or imprisoned due to faulty accusations? Where are DNA samples found, and what is it? If there’s no blood at …show more content…
Shlomit Avraham, a scientist and author of "Forensic DNA Analysis From Rocks And Stones In Criminal Cases, believes that “although rocks can pose as a problematic substrate for retrieval of DNA profiles, it may be the missing link in providing a solution in specific forensic cases” (Avraham 793). According to Avraham, “the amount of DNA transferred through skin contact, referred to as touch DNA, is variable and has been shown to be affected by a number of known factors: shedder status, hand washing, personal habits, type of contact (pressure, friction), substrate (rough or smooth surfaces), and perspiration” (Avraham …show more content…
Aronson, an assistant Professor of Science in the History Department at Carnegie Mellon University and Simon A. Cole, an associate Professor of Criminology and law at the University of California discuss the transformation of the death penalty in the United States. Aronson and Cole suggest that DNA evidence may be more accurate and reliable than other forensic science ( Aronson and Cole 603). They also point out that over the past decade, “innocence has become a dominant concern in the death penalty discourse with an unprecedented effect on the debate about capital punishment” (Aronson and Cole 604). How has innocence evolved for the death penalty? The professors argue that the death penalty has transitioned away from “moral and procedural considerations, and toward the more substantial question of guilt and innocence” (Aronson and Cole
In the studies conducted by Appleby and Kassin, it was reported that conviction rate went up by 20-30% with a confession, exculpatory DNA, and theory that might seem plausible was told by prosecutors (Appleby & Kassin, 2016). So far there are 19 cases known of innocent defendants that were still convicted with the exculpatory DNA because of their confessions to the authorities (Appleby & Kassin, 2016). The purpose of the article was to demonstrate the degree to which a confession, and not DNA, may be
We know that DNA testing is giving hope to the hopeless in prison. Margret Berger (2006) comments, “Even though the number of inmates released as a consequence of DNA testing is minuscule in contrast to the two million persons incarcerated in the United States, the DNA exonerations have had an enormous impact on the fundamental assumptions about the American criminal justice system and how it operates.” Changes like the desirability of the death penalty, the growing concerns on how forensic laboratories operate alongside the increasing interest in forensic science overall. For instance, as the number of exonerations continues to rise, the number of people being placed on death row is decreasing thanks to Supreme Court rulings that juveniles under the age of 18 and the mentally ill cannot be sentenced to death. The death penalty is overall losing its appeal to society, not just because of the DNA testing, but people become aware of the wrongful convictions of other crimes as well.
victim and the defendant may be influential without clear guidance about the deliberation rules. Black suspects and White victims; blacks were more likely to receive a death sentence vs White suspects and black victims “Not only did killing a White person rather than a Black person increase the likelihood of being sentenced to death, but also Black defendants were more likely than White defendants to be sentenced to death” (Eberhaedt, 2006). Peter Neufeld and Barry Scheck founded The innocence Project, in 1992, their mission was to free those who were wrongly convicted of crimes through DNA. To date. there are approximately 350 people exonerated of crimes they didn’t commit through the Innocence project.
Cold Cases should be Reopened Introduction In the past, finding more than one suspects at a crime scene was likely to lead to a dead-end investigation, and in other cases the arrest of an innocent suspect, instead of the criminal that committed the crime (Delvin para 3). The indication of making an illegal decision is that the offender would likely be released due to the lack of proof, and an innocent person sentenced to jail for an offense they did not committed. In essence, many injustices have been committed against the victims of crimes and the suspects that go to jail or receive other punishment are innocent persons. However, the recent discovery of DNA technology and changes of law have led to the realization that the new technology
There will always be a biased jury, or inconclusive evidence to support that a crime, like that of Tom Robinson’s, to kill a human being. We will be taking an in depth look at the faults of this
In the lab report three students are tested along with one suspect. Student number two’s DNA matched the suspects DNA. The student’s DNA’s are cut with five different enzymes as well as the suspects DNA. Student two’s DNA matched exactly with the suspects DNA; the other two student’s DNA did not resemble the suspects DNA at all. (Choi, et al, 2008) DNA fingerprinting is used a lot in determining who committed a crime.
However, other people may be believe that the American Criminal Justice System is trustworthy and fair to all individuals. Thus, they believe innocents should have nothing to fear based on the assumption that the Criminal Justice System is never mistaken. Given the advanced technology used in courtrooms today, people think that this can always be depended on for accurate results. For instance, in modern courtrooms, prosecutors and attorneys use “undeniable scientific evidence” such as DNA testing and fingerprint evidence (Volokh). Therefore, some people think that it is virtually impossible for an innocent person to be convicted for a crime with this irrefutable technology.
In Randall’s article, she gives a few examples of individuals who have been wrongly convicted, in the first example she says “Kirk L. Odom was wrongfully imprisoned for more than 22 years for a 1981 rape and murder. He completed his prison term in 2003, but it was not until July 2012 that DNA evidence exonerated him of the crimes.” (Randall 1) Randall states the fact that Odom even finished his sentence before the FBI figured out he was innocent, but what good is that if 22 years of his life were taken from him. And a similar case happened, in 1978 Santae A. Tribble was convicted for murder and was not exonerated until 2012.
Making a Murder, a popular crime documentary on the streaming service Netflix, brought an important case to light: the murder of Teresa Halbach and the conviction of Steven Avery and his nephew Brendan Dassey. The documentary focused on pieces of evidence that intend to show the innocence of both individuals. When also looking at the evidence of the prosecution, even more questions on their guilt or innocence come to mind. As a country, we follow the ideal that you are innocent until proven guilty. In the case of Steven Avery, individuals believe that this was not taken into consideration.
The states that “This paper is not intended to definitively place all wrongful convictions as a state crime or harm. However, it follows the calls of Leo (2005), Siegel (2005), and Norris and Bonventre (2013) in providing theoretical grounding for wrongful conviction.” The author states since 1989, there has been over 1,300 exonerations. He further breaks down the data by stating that of the 1,300 exonerations, 37% of those were based on DNA evidence. While 1,300 exonerated individuals is a small margin of error for the criminal justice system that doesn’t mean that problem is not significant.
The United States criminal justice system is riddled with cases of many varieties. Some have obvious outcomes while others warrant more detailed analysis. However, some cases go beyond the court into other courts, where they are decided, such as Jackson versus Hobbs in 2012. The courts try to lighten the load of cases they have by offering plea bargaining, an agreement among a defendant and a prosecutor in which the defendant pleads guilty to a charge that is less severe than what he or she is initially charged for in the hopes that clemency will be administered. Sometimes, however, people accused of a crime are completely innocent, and it is not until technology is released, such as DNA testing, decades later that these people are proved to
When convict individuals for criminal acts and making sure the right person is captured it may be best for law officials to use DNA evidence that would exonerate wrongfully-convictions. In recent years there has been great advancements in technology that would allow investigators to use when trying to prove evidence on individuals who are sitting on death row. Citizens have also, made great efforts ensuring innocent people are not convicted for crimes they did not commit. According, to the Equal Justice in 1973, there were at least 156 people released from the criminal justice system for being wrongfully convicted. When innocent people are wrongfully convicted it not only take away many years of their lives, and causing hurt to the victim’s
Since the founding of our judicial system there have always been individuals claiming innocence to a crime that they have been found guilty of, traditionally, after their sentencing no matter how innocent they may or may not be would have to serve, live and possibly die by the decision of their peers. The Innocence Project, founded in 1992 by Barry C. Scheck alongside Peter J. Neufeld faces this issue by challenging the sentencing of convicted individuals who claim their innocence and have factual ground to stand upon. The Innocence Project uses the recent advances in deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) testing to prove their client’s innocence by using methods that were not available, too primitive or not provided to their clients during their investigation,
Convicting the Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong In Brandon L. Garrett 's book, Convicting the Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong, he makes it very clear how wrongful convictions occur and how these people have spent many years in prison for crimes they never committed. Garrett presents 250 cases of innocent people who were convicted wrongfully because the prosecutors opposed testing the DNA of those convicted. Garrett provided simple statistics such as graphs, percentages, and charts to help the reader understand just how great of an impact this was.
DNA in forensic science The majority of cells making up the human body are diploid cells carrying identical DNA, with the exception of haploid gametes and red blood cells. Several types of biological evidence such as blood and hair are commonly used in forensic science, which is the scientific study of evidence for crime scene investigations and other legal matters. Forensic science is used for the purpose of DNA analysis, this is the analysis of DNA samples to determine if it came from a particular individual. DNA analysis is done by obtaining DNA samples from an individual; next, a large sample of DNA is produced from amplified selected sequences from the DNA collected.