Solving the Case A man was walking his dog at night when he heard a gunshot. He ran to the place where he heard it and saw a young man shot on the floor with a gun beside him. He picked it up carelessly and put it aside then called 911. When the police arrived they took all the evidence with them. A month later there are police at his doorstep arresting him for the murder of the young man. He knew he was innocent so he requested a DNA test to set things straight.The police found fingerprints on the gun that belonged to another person who had actually committed the crime and he was set free. Penal Code 1405 was created for the convicted felons already in jail that have a reason to be found innocent. This policy was created specifically for California to get those innocent people out of jail. Others may claim that DNA evidence isn’t sufficient to convict someone for a crime or prove others innocent. But, DNA evidence from crime scenes has helped solve many more cases and found the criminals than those cases where people were wrongly convicted. Penal code 1405 gives convicted felons the chance to submit a written motion to the court to request forensic DNA testing. Penal code 1405 should remain a law because it gives incarcerated …show more content…
The Department of Justice says, "States began passing laws requiring offenders convicted of certain offenses to provide DNA samples." That DNA evidence can help convict someone of a crime and it helps to uncover more things about the crime itself. Investigators have been using forensic science to help them solve cases since before the 90 's, mostly fingerprints that were found at the crime scenes and on the victims (O 'Brien). DNA evidence has solved countless cases including ones that happened over a prolonged period of time because of the technological advancements there is
Before the advancements in science and DNA discovery, there have been many men and woman executed for a crime he/ she did not commite. After DNA was discovered there have been cases where DNA has exonerated date row inmates. If DNA wasn't discovered many men and women would have been executed and if DNA testing was available earlier it would have easily proven that Cameron Todd Willingham, Corsicana, Texas was innocent.
After the Missouri Supreme Court affirmed his conviction, his death sentence, and the denial of post-conviction relief, Simmons sought a writ of habeas corpus from the court, arguing that the prohibitions on “cruel and unusual punishment” imposed by article I section 21 of the Missouri Construction and by the Eight Amendment of the United States Construction bar the execution of an individual who committed a capital crime when under the age of eighteen” (EIGHTH AMENDMENT -- DEATH PENALTY -- MISSOURI SUPREME COURT HOLDS THAT THE JUVENILE DEATH PENALTY VIOLATES THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT. ,
A store kept having missing firearms on their delivery trucks. The weird thing about this was that the seal on the truck was never damaged or broke. We knew that the firearms where making it on the truck but couldn’t figure out where they were going from there. When conducting his investigation he found out that the same truck driver was always driving the truck. My boss partnered with the ATF and they did surveillance where they followed this truck to a wooded area and watched the truck driver somehow was able to take the hinges off the doors and were able to get into the truck that way.
Unfortunately, police and interrogators can twist the whole case around and convict an innocent person and may never even find the actual person who committed the crime. DNA testing is a powerful way to see who committed the crime. However, fingerprints are never the same, even for the same person, and like the example in the article told, there could be a twisting of the story. They might say oh the blood does not match you five, there must have been a sixth person and you five did not bleed on the victim. Even DNA testing can make innocent people commit to being guilty.
In 1892 the Canadian Criminal Code was proclaimed for a country that was never thought of to become a nation with more than 35 million individuals and as developed as it is politically, socially, and economically. Our great nation has expanded into an ever changing and transitioning society that as it moves forward crimes are committed across the board by individuals of Canada’s various different races and cultures, where in which sentences are demanded to ensure Canada remains fair and just. The 1892 Criminal Code didn’t account for the developments, expansions, and transitions that Canada has endured over a hundred years, and Canada looks nothing like it did in 1892. Due to the changes, our provinces and territories have all developed substantially;
PENAL CODE 243(d) – BATTERY CAUSING SERIOUS BODILY INJURY Penal Code 243(d) states: “When a battery is committed against any person and serious bodily injury is inflicted on the person, the battery is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for two, three, or four years.” Explanation Penal Code 243(d) deals with aggravated battery, which refers to an unlawful and willful use of force or act of violence that causes grievous bodily injury to another person. It refers to an act of physical contact that led to the injury. Mere words, no matter how offensive, do not constitute battery causing serious bodily injury.
In chapter 8 of Criminal Law of Today, the author describes the crime of assault, battery, mayhem, false imprisonment, kidnapping, and the crime of threat. The author identifies two types of common law assault and the types of injuries of a victim that are required in order to be considered crime of battery. The author also explains the difference between common law rape and modern statutes describing sexual assault. Although both crime of assault and crime of battery are nothing alike, they are often used together.
One of the most accurate methods of connecting a suspect with a crime is through the use of DNA analysis. Even if no fingerprints are left behind at a robbery, for instance, a single strand of hair or skin cell from the thief can be used to positively identify a suspect. Conversely, if a suspect’s DNA does not match samples procured from a crime scene, the use of so-called “genetic fingerprinting” can exonerate, or clear, them. Concern over the issue of wrongful convictions, coupled with a sense of greater trust in DNA analysis over other, more conventional methods of prosecution, such as eyewitness testimony, has led some to call for mandatory DNA testing before any person begins serving a sentence for a serious crime, as well as
At first they found a key piece of evidence on a body: A fingerprint. However this fingerprint wasn’t as useful as it would be today because of the fingerprinting systems in 1984. The only way they could link a suspect to a crime is after he had been identified, but the killer had not been yet. So if they wanted to match the fingerprint to something they’d have to go through 6 million fingerprints on file. The second piece of physical evidence that the police found was bullet casings at different crime scenes.
Science has come a long way over the years. It has helped countless every day struggles and cure diseases most commonly found. What you don’t hear about however is the advancement of forensic science. Forensic science has helped solve countless cases of murder, rape, and sexual assault. In the case of John Joubert, it helped solve the murders of three young boys with one small piece of evidence that linked him directly to the crime.
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.
The ability to discover so much with so little seems to make accurate court verdicts much easier. However, modern technology has not proved to be effective in reaching the correct decision as forensic science has had little impact on court error. According to a national geographic article, “I thought that improvements in DNA technology might have lowered our error rate, but the researchers don’t think it makes much of a dent. Just 18 of the 142 exonerations since 1973 were thanks to DNA testing.” (Hughes).
Judges, lawyers, and police officers have expressed that jurors have unrealistic expectations regarding the capabilities of crime labs and their ability to produce physical evidence. In 2006, 61% of law enforcement agencies indicated that they had insufficient storage capacity, funds, technology, staff, or space especially as it relates to DNA evidence . Durnal reports that in worst cases, evidence is completely ignored or left behind because there isn’t any room to properly store it. In addition, some accounts have suggested that this greater demand has contributed to the increasing number of DNA testing backlogs in crime labs all over the country. Police officers, investigators, and laboratory workers have admitted that they feel the pressure
Evidence based on scientific explanations is a good evidence that can be used in the criminal justice system. In addition, these evidences based on forensic science can be very useful and critical where these evidences can free innocently convicted accused. Criminal cases such as Duke lacrosse, David Millggard, Clayton Johnson, and Talao are examples of case that forensic science helped to prove their innocence. However, there is potential possibility that these evidences of forensic science can lead to wrongful convictions when the criminal justice system subjectively look into the scientific evidences. Michel Shirley in 1987 was arrested in 1987 for the murder and rape of Linda Cooke.
One of the most necessary aspects of criminal justice is forensic science, which involves the study of scientifically inspecting physical evidence, which has been collected from a crime scene. Some people define forensic science as being the application of science to law enforcement. You can use forensic science in the most challenging situations, for example, if there are no witnesses to a crime, or any leads, it can usually mean that forensic evidence is all the court has to work with. For example, if a body has been left in a septic tank in the middle of an abandoned warehouse, and the body is beyond recognition by physical features alone, forensic teams will be called in to examine dental work and observe the skeleton, in order to determine