Criminal and evidence investigation.
What can forensic scientists and the court do to ensure that juries are not misled by expert evidence?
To pass this mini-assessment you are expected to do the following:
1. Answer the question relevantly and appropriately.
2. Make reference to and discuss in relation to the question at least 2 sources of academic research and/or parliamentary Select Committee reports/proceedings.
3. Discuss at least two or three uk cases in relation to the question. These may be used to establish a legal point, or to illustrate a point about criminal investigation (for example, how certain police practices may result in misleading evidence), or both. It is not enough to simply cite a case, you must also explain its relevance.
4. Write clearly and succinctly.You have the normal 10% word allowance (ie. a maximum of 550 words excluding the title and reference list).
5. Include clear citation and a reference list for all sources used (according to oscola referencing)
6. Submit using Microsoft Word (not Works or anything else).
Before writing this mini-assignment please look at the following sources:
Sanders, A, Young, R. And Burton, M. (2010) Criminal Justice, (5th ed.) Oxford: Oxford University Press (chapter 6, p. 362 – 367)
Pepper, I. (2004) Crime Scene Investigation: methods and procedures, Open University Press (not a particularly academic source but a good detailed overview of crime scene investigation. Chapter 2 in particular may be of interest) http://www.dawsonera.com/depp/reader/protected/external/EBookView/S9780335227440/S24
For a more advanced discussion of the relationship between policing, forensic science and market forces (which will be one of the themes of the lecture) see Lawless, C.J. (2011) Policing Markets: the contested shaping of neo-liberal forensic science, British Journal of Criminology, 51, 671-689 (attached).
House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology (2011), The Forensic Science Service Ch. 2, available at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmsctech/855/85505.htm#a6
— (13 Feb 2013) ?�Uncorrected Transcript of Oral Evidence: Forensic Science’ available at
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmsctech/uc930-iii/uc930iii.pdf (note: ?�FSS’ in this document means Forensic Science Service).
Broeders, A.P.A. (2007) Principles of Forensic Identification Science in T. Newburn, T. Williamson and A. Wright (eds) Handbook of Criminal Investigation, available at: http://www.dawsonera.com/depp/reader/protected/external/AbstractView/S9781843926153
Fraser, J. (2007) The Application of Forensic Science to Criminal Investigation in T. Newburn, T. Williamson and A. Wright (eds) Handbook of Criminal Investigation, available at: http://www.dawsonera.com/depp/reader/protected/external/AbstractView/S9781843926153
There is an extensive selection of readings and broadcasts in the “Expert Evidence” folder in th eBridge Resources section. The following are particularly relevant to the assignment:
· Expert Witnesses: Role, Ethics and Accountability (Ward, forthcoming)
· Fingerprint Inquiry Scotland, esp. Ch. 2 of the Report
· Fingerprints on Trial (BBC Radio 4)
· Panorama: Shaken Babies
· The Coming Paradigm Shift in Forensic Identification Science (Saks & Koehler 2005)
There are also sub-folders on three cases relating to expert evidence. (But note that the Eddie Gilfoyle case, which may or may not be a miscarriage, concerns the exclusion of expert evidence for the defence.)
Additional resources for assignment