legal medicine midterm powerpoint

8/13/2019 LEgal Medicine Midterm Powerpoint

1/41

GROUPE # 1: Arcide, Bollos, Bollen

THE IMPACT OF DNA AND OTHER TECHNOLOGY ON THECRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: IMPROVEMENTS ANDCOMPLICATIONS

Source: Julie A. Singer, Monica K. Miller, and Meera Adya

I. Introduction

As humans, we seem to have an innate desire to explain the world

around us and invent things to change our world. This curiosity has

encouraged inventions and technological advances that affect every

aspect of our lives. Technological advances such as DNA technologyhave shaped the criminal and civil justice systems .


2/41

II. The Impact of New Technology on Society

Technological advances have had a deep impact on our society.

Personal computers became available for home use, and nowmost households in the United States have at least one

computer. Partially fueling this explosion of computer use was

the creation of the microprocessor. The processors for

computers used to fill entire rooms, but with the invention of the

microprocessor, these chips are now small enough to fit inside acell phone.

Today we have global banking, in which complex transactions

can be completed electronically. "Financial transactions that

used to take hours to complete" now can be conducted in

minutes. Information is also available to us more quickly than

ever before with the prevalence of wi-fi networks for laptop

computers, cellular phones, and PDAs that allow us to stay in

constant communication and look up information no matter

where we are. Certainly these advances in technology have

changed the way we live.


3/41

A. Computer Technology in the Legal System

The legal system has also benefited from advances in computer

technology.Computer simulation models- They help to determine the cause of

automobile, train, and airplane accidents. Cognitive science

researchers have also helped investigators reconstruct accidents by

conducting studies that show limitations associated with vision while

driving. Cognitive abilities are affected by age and cell phone use.

Research has also demonstrated the importance of properly

determining right-of-way, vehicle location, and alcohol use when

developing accident appraisals.

These computer advancements have clearly affected the legal

system by clarifying the extent of culpability of various parties in

liability cases. With these computer simulations in hand, it becomes

much easier for attorneys to argue negligence of drivers, pilots,

manufacturers, and other parties in determining the causation of

accidents.


4/41

Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) as an alternative to face-to-face

mediation of legal disputes. The Virtual Magistrate, "provides an online

mediation service to regulate online disputes in diverse subject areas

including intellectual property infringements ... defamation, fraud anddeceptive trade practices."

Online Ombudsman, offers a chance to settle disputes involving

"members of news groups, list servers, cyberspace competitors, Internet

service providers, domain name disputes, spamming allegations and

copyright disputes."

These online services provide a quick, economical resolution to legal

disputes that was not possible before the computer age.


5/41

B. Medical Breakthroughs and the Legal System

Medical breakthroughs have affected our lives by allowing doctors to treat disease

earlier and more effectively. Cutting-edge cancer research is employing

bionanotechnology and using "engineered DNA and protein to build tinyprogrammable machines (smaller than one thousandth the width of a human hair)

that can find cancer cells and either mark them in a diagnostic procedure or ...

selectively destroy them."

Advances in medical and genetic testing and research have also been used in a

variety of ways, including:

A. Demonstrating the cause of an injury, establishing paternity, and predicting a

potential employee's predisposition to illness.

B. In the early 1980s, an increase in cocaine use concerned medical and legal

professionals. Scientists used medical research and testing to show how

prenatal drug exposure could result in harm to fetuses.

C. Family courts have also utilized DNA technology to determine paternity of

children for custody and child support purposes.

Relying on this medical technology, prosecutors have successfully prosecuted

women for causing harm to their fetuses by using drugs during pregnancy.


6/41

Employment law - employment discrimination based on the results of

genetic tests.

Executive Order 13,145 (which applies only to federal employees) prohibitsdiscrimination on the basis of genetic information.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) - prohibits discrimination against

people with disabilities, but the ADA does not explicitly cover presymptomatic

individuals so it is unclear how much protection the ADA may offer for these

individuals. A positive test for a disorder is not necessarily dispositive, this maylead to employers selecting out individuals who in fact have no disability.

The U.S. Supreme Court have interpreted the ADA in a way that is likely to

substantially limit plaintiffs' ability to bring actions. However, the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has interpreted the ADA to apply

to genetic discrimination, so the potential for courts to adopt this interpretation

exists.


7/41

Genetic test results for employees is through direct testing of biological materials

voluntarily turned over by employees (e.g., blood or urine). Employees will submit

to testing when company policy or law requires it, as in the case of drug testing

conducted on employees. One example of permissible genetic testing of

employees involves chemical sensitivities; tests are allowed to ensure that likelychemical exposure on the job will not harm employees.

Impermissible testing can also occur. In Norman-Bloodsaw v. Lawrence Berkeley

Laboratory, employees of Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory sued their employer

because the employees found out that blood and urine samples voluntarily

submitted during standard pre-and post-employment health exams had been

tested for sickle cell anemia and other conditions. The Ninth Circuit, ruling against

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, found that submission to routine medical exams

does not per se amount to submission for genetic and pregnancy testing. There

is a possible violation of right and discrimination in this case.

New technologies have the ability to revolutionize the courts. They will allow

online legal disputes to be handled quickly and efficiently. They also allow

accident reconstructionists to understand the reasons why accidents occur and

who may have been at fault in specific incidents. Finally, they have revolutionized

employment law. All of these advances have had a tremendous impact on the

way the civil justice system operates.


8/41

III. Positive Effects of New Technology on the Criminal Justice

System

A. DNA Technology in Criminal Cases: Identification of Innocent

Persons

The impact of DNA testing on the legal system cannot be overstated; it

is one of the more transformative developments that have taken place in

recent legal history. DNA tests affect legal outcomes by providing

certainty about identity in a way that has not been possible before. Muchcivil and criminal legal adjudication requires identification of a person.

In civil cases it can be used to establish paternity. In criminal contexts it

can be used to establish the likely guilt or innocence of a suspect when

biological evidence is present. This is the most notable and positive

impact of DNA technology.

DNA tests allow more sophisticated testing to determine the probability

that DNA at crime scenes matches the DNA of the suspect. Similarly,

technological advances now allow investigators to successfully lift DNA

profiles from items such as cigarette butts, candy wrappers, and saliva.


9/41

Two powerful forms of Non Physical Evidence:

1. Non-physical evidence include a defendant's own admission

2. Eyewitness placing the accused at the scene of the crime.

Unfortunately, both of these forms of evidence have been demonstrated

to be more fallible than many believe.

Psychological research on eyewitness memory has shown that false

identification rates can be quite high and that jurors are fairly insensitive

to factors that affect eyewitness testimony.

Confessions has shown confessions are a powerful form of evidence.

However, these confessions have been shown to be falsely obtained

under many circumstances, and jurors have been shown to be poor at

detecting false confessions.

Lab-based research suggests is that eyewitnesses make errors, people falsely

confess to crimes, and, most importantly, we may not always be able to look

at circumstances after the fact and judge who are accurate eyewitnesses or

who are coerced confessors.


10/41

Real-world data demonstrates the problem with the help of DNA testing. Many

confessions and eyewitness identifications have been demonstrated to be

erroneous. This problem is not trivial; while prison sentences themselves are an

abomination for an innocent person, there are those who have been sentenced to

death on the basis of incorrect identifications secured by unreliable confessions oreyewitness identifications.

Because of the fear that innocent people may be executed, DNA evidence has

exonerated offenders found guilty by our justice system on the basis of other

evidence.

Because of concerns over faulty evidence convicting the wrong man, in early

January 2006, Virginia Governor Mark Warner ordered new DNA tests in the case

of Roger Keith Coleman, who had already been executed in 1992 for rape and

murder. However, these DNA tests confirmed that Coleman was rightfully

convicted for his crimes. This news came as a blow to Coleman's supporters, who

believed in his innocence, and to death penalty opponents who were certain thatthis case would involve "the first scientific proof that an innocent man had been

executed in the USA."

This case illustrates that not only can DNA free the innocent, it also can reaffirm

the accuracy and validity of the legal system in catching those who are guilty.


11/41

B. DNA Technology in Criminal Cases: Apprehension of Repeat and

Escalating Offenders

CODIS (Combined DNA Index System or CODIS) - Law enforcementagencies in Florida and New York have been retrieving biological

evidence from minor crimes, such as property crimes, and using them to

catch criminals before they move on to the commission of more major

offenses such as homicide and rape. For example, the New York City

Police Department's data for the first 1,000 successfully matched DNA

samples that were checked against samples comprising the FBI database

demonstrated that the majority of them were linked to major crimes (e.g.,

murder and sex offenses).

Most importantly, however, is that 82% of those matched samples or

offenders were already in CODIS because they had been convicted of amore minor crime (e.g., burglary or drugs). By testing biological evidence

from minor crimes, perpetrator's samples become a part of the CODIS

databank; profiles of repeat offenders can then begin to be developed and

crime pattern analysis may lead to the repeat offenders being caught

before they become escalating offenders.


12/41

C. Computer Technology and the Legal System

Other technologies also have benefited the criminal justice system.

Computer technology has allowed businesses to outsmart criminals:

1. New business intelligence software that profiles financial customers'

spending habits; if strange purchases are happening at odd times or

places, their bank will be alerted.

The "system also compares what it believes are genuine transactions with

profiles of criminal spending habits that the bank has modelled from

hundreds of fraud cases" to determine which transactions are related to

illegal activities.

2. Fraud Network- a database that has also been developed by fifty of the

world's largest banks to "track and share data on online fraud behavior.


13/41

3. VIPER - Video Identification Parade Electronic Recording - Anew

system, implemented in Scotland, allows eyewitnesses make it

emotionally easier for eyewitnesses to pick out criminals in line-ups and

to make their identifications anywhere, such as from their home or

hospital bed.

The suspect is photographed by the computer beforehand, and after

their physical and ethnic details have been entered into the system, the

computer comes up with twelve similar faces, which are then narrowed

down to eight with the help of the defense attorney on the case. Theseimages are then burned onto a DVD, which can be viewed anywhere.

n79 Supporters say it allows eyewitnesses to feel safe as they make

their identification and it takes away the necessity for the police to try to

find individuals physically similar to the suspect.


14/41

D. Advances in Fingerprinting

Some law enforcement agencies have abando ned the pract ice of taking

ink f ingerpr in ts of those arrested and have purchased technologies.

Instead allow them to take digi ta l f ingerpr ints, which can then beinstantly transmitted to databases to search for a match.

1. Capacitive scanning - "uses a sophisticated silicon chip to read and

analyse electromagnetic signals generated below the skin's surface."

2. Thermal scanning of fingerprints - differences in temperature between

the ridges and valleys of the fingerprint allow the image of the print to be

produced more accurately.

3. Palm prints - 50% of all prints lifted from crime scenes are palm prints.FBI is now considering establishing a national registry specifically for palm

prints.


15/41

E. GPS Tracking Devices

Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking devices.

Case No 1 : The Scott Peterson trial: "Modesto police attached GPS

devices to a number of Peterson's vehicles" so that they could track his

movements following his wife's disappearance.

The judge in the Peterson trial, Judge Delucci, allowed this GPS

evidence into trial, the first time it had been ruled admissible in aCalifornia courtroom.

Case No 2: GPS evidence has been used in other cases, however; one

notable case was in the disappearance of a nine-year-old girl in

Spokane, Washington in 1999. "Authorities suspected her father ... had

something to do with her disappearance, so they attached a GPS

tracking device to his car." This device revealed that he had visited a

remote site outside of Spokane "where the girl's body was later found";

the father was convicted for the murder of his daughter.


16/41

GPS tracking devices can also be used to track the

movements of child sex offenders.

Passive systems - which may only record the location of sex

offenders once a day.

Active systems should be implemented, which would allow"minute-by-minute updates on their whereabouts."

Lifetime monitoring -A new bill is being debated in Wisconsin

that would allow lifetime monitoring of those on "supervisedrelease for first-degree sexual assault of children." Law

enforcement agencies would be alerted when the sex

offender went to "off-limits areas," such as schools.


17/41

Gang members. Mayor Thomas M. Menino of Boston is

suggesting that suspected gang members wear GPS-

monitored electronic bracelets while released on bail for guncrimes.

The gang members would be prohibited from visiting

"exclusion zones" such as drug locations and rival gang

members' turf.

"An alarm will signal probation officers" if the suspect does

enter one of these zones, and an alert will be sent to

police.Further, the suspect's bracelet will beep and vibrate,and probation officers will call the offender immediately on a

cell phone provided by the probation office to inform him ofthe violation.


18/41

F. Detecting Deception

1. Polygraphs or lie detectors- criticised to be ineffective.

2. Event-Related Potentials or ERPs - measure electrical

activity in the brain; eye trackers, which measure the length

of time eyes rest on familiar versus unfamiliar objects;

infrared scanners which look for "subtle changes in capillaryblood flow to the face";

3. Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) - looks

for brain regions activated by lying.It is clear that technological advancements in many fields

have greatly improved the capabilities of both law

enforcement and the courts to do their jobs.


19/41

IV. Negative and Unintended Effects of New Technology

A. Jurors' Understanding of Technical Evidence

Technological breakthroughs, such as DNA analysis, have the potential

to allow law enforcement to more accurately find perpetrators of crime.

However, any evidence uncovered by these new technologies must be

explained at trial to the jurors in the case; these jurors have the task of

distinguishing good science from bad science and of determining thereliability of the evidence collected. The question then becomes, how do

jurors complete this task? And how well do they do it?

Jurors did not feel that complicated technical evidence was adequately

explained to them. Most jurors try to pay close attention to the evidencebeing presented, but if they are unable to understand it, they will use

cues such as the experience and credentials of the expert witness to

determine the validity of their testimony.


20/41

Another study found that when trying to distinguish between good

and bad science, jurors were able to recognize "general

acceptance" and "ecological validity" as two important

methodological factors to be considered when evaluating scientificevidence.

However, the authors note that these two factors are not foolproof and

that jurors may not realize there is more to consider, such as "internal

validity" and "construct validity", when determining the quality of

science.

Jurors are likely to commit serious mathematical errors when

dealing with probabilistic evidence, such as DNA match statistics.

They often seriously underestimate the weight of probabilistic

evidence and incorrectly combine very small probability errors,inflating them, even when given simple instructions on how to

combine them. Such errors could have serious implications for how

the jurors evaluate this DNA evidence in light of other evidence and

could affect their ultimate verdict.


21/41

B. Crime Lab Errors

Another negative consequence is in how such technologies can

be misused and exploited by the people who use them.The Houston police DNA lab underwent a grand jury investigation

in 2003, following accusations of sloppy, incompetent work. The

DNA lab was shut down and independent labs are currently

retesting DNA evidence from 370 cases; so far 21 cases have

called the original lab's results into question.

Joyce Gilchrist, for example, worked as a forensic chemist for the

Oklahoma City Police for 21 years before her misidentifications

were discovered. So far, three men she helped convict have been

exonerated.In a similar example of crime laboratory flaws, Fred Zain, a

chemist at the West Virginia state crime lab for 12 years, was

indicted for false testimony after it was discovered he submitted

false laboratory reports to the court. His false reports helped

convict at least six men in two states.


22/41

Lab technicians, falsifying data -Though mistakes may be made in both local

and state level crime labs, many still believed that the most prestigious crime lab

in the country, run by the FBI, would be somehow immune from these human

errors.

This has not been the case, however, and widespread issues began to beuncovered in the late 1990s. In 1997, a whistleblower at the FBI crime lab

alerted officials to the fact that several lab technicians were falsifying data, not

keeping accurate records, and failing to disclose some pieces of evidence.

These mistakes affected high profile cases such as the 1993 World Trade

Center bombing and the Oklahoma City bombing.

These issues affected a total of 50 cases. The four lab technicians implicated

were later disciplined and transferred to other divisions or resigned from the FBI.

Database Error - In early 2004, the FBI aroused new controversy when a

suspected serial killer was released following a botched fingerprint check.

Georgia police arrested Jeremy Bryan Jones on a trespassing charge and his

prints were sent to the FBI. The FBI fingerprint database did not correctly match

these prints to those of his already in the system, and he was released. He

allegedly killed two more women following his release. The FBI blamed a

database error for the mistake.


23/41

FBI examiners at fault - The case of a lawyer from Portland, Oregon

named Brandon Mayfield. His fingerprints were erroneously matched to

those left on a bag of detonators that was connected to the bombings in

Madrid.This time, FBI examiners, and not the fingerprint database, were blamed

for the wrong match. Mayfield claims the U.S. government singled him

out because of his recent conversion to Islam.

He brought a lawsuit against the Department of Justice, the AttorneyGeneral, the FBI, and the four FBI employees who wrongly made the

match.

Conclusive Scientific Evidence - The prevalence of these errors in the

system may soon be cause for even more concern. Former Governor Mitt

Romney of Massachusetts announced last year that he wished to

implement a new system within the state.

In capital cases, death penalty verdicts would require "conclusive

scientific evidence" of guilt before a defendant could be convicted.


24/41

This plan would not require absolute scientific proof but would require a

jury to find evidence "reaching a high level of scientific certainty."

Critics argue that this idea is problematic because forensic techniqueswidely accepted in the past are no longer admissible in court.

Fingerprinting, for example, long thought to be the gold standard, has

come under fire.

Distortions - Even a relatively recent advancement in fingerprinting, theuse of digital fingerprints, has had reported problems associated with oily

residue being picked up on subsequent scans, which can cause

distortions. Should the same trend continue, techniques widely accepted

as foolproof now may be revealed to be faulty in the future.


25/41

Other Issues:

1. Sloppy lab work

2. Overworked and understaffed labs

3. Intentional manipulation of evidence.

DNA evidence is only helpful in some crimes, as a DNA match only proves that a

defendant was present at the scene, and not that he committed the crime.

FALACY - While DNA and other technology is generally accurate, human error

can make it detrimental. Thus, it has the same inherent problem as eyewitness

evidence and false confessions. There is an erroneous belief that scientific

evidence is more reliable than other types of evidence, when many times this is

not the case. Such a false belief could be leading the criminal justice system

down a dangerous path.


26/41

C. The CSI Effect

CSI: Crime Scene Investigation. These types of shows have become increasingly

popular with the American public; a recent look at the Nielsen ratings showed that

nine forensic crime television dramas were in the top twenty prime-time shows.

Unrealistic Expectations - Some critics have raised concerns that watching these

shows has a detrimental effect on potential jurors, leading to what has been called

the "CSI effect."On these television shows, forensic science is "fast and infallible

and always gets its man;" this leads jurors to have unrealistic expectations of

what real life crime labs, police, and prosecuting attorneys are capable of doing.

Unavailable or irrelevant - Prosecutors complain that these shows make it more

difficult for them to secure convictions because jurors do not understand that

scientific evidence is not available or even relevant in many cases.

Inapplicable - These shows depict advanced laboratory equipment that many real

life crime labs cannot afford, and process DNA evidence and other forensic

evidence in minutes, whereas in real life such tests may take weeks or

months to process.


27/41

Inexistent - It has been estimated that 40% of the forensic science

depicted on "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" does not even exist.

Absurdity - Prosecutors also worry that the CSI effect raises the burden ofproof in cases to a level of "absurdity;" arguing that jurors now want and

expect "100 percent proof" before they will convict.

Negative evidence witnesses- explains to jurors why real life crime scene

investigators often do not find any forensic evidence at crime scenes.Social framework testimony is based on findings from general research,

rather than research that is connected to the parties in the trial. This type

of expert testimony does not deal with the case at hand; instead, it

provides jurors with general information about psychological factors

involved in the case, of which they may be unaware. Such testimony is

included to discourage the use of faulty beliefs or stereotypes related to

these psychological factors, with the hope that these factors will not

inappropriately affect their decisions. Such an expert could be brought in to

discuss the limitations of scientific evidence generally, to counter any CSI

effect that may be occurring in the jury.


28/41

CSI Viewing Habits- Because of concern over the CSI effect, many prosecutors

believe that potential jurors should be asked about their television viewing habits

during voir dire, and those who report watching "CSI: Crime Scene

Investigation" and similar shows should be challenged for cause. In one case,

where crucial evidence supporting the prosecution's case was never found, thedefense attorney sought out frequent "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation"

watchers, who would be able to spot such a gap in the evidence; his client was

acquitted.

Forensic evidence as Infallible - CSI effect exists at all, it has the opposite

effect from what many fear. Instead of making juries critical of prosecutors'cases, the researchers instead found that those who watched "CSI: Crime

Scene Investigation" frequently were more likely to see forensic evidence as

infallible, favoring the prosecution and guilty verdicts.

A second preliminary survey that was recently conducted found that many

people believe forensic science is infallible and that DNA is the best evidence,

as compared to other kinds of forensic evidence. Further, television viewing of

crime dramas predicted judgments of the reliability of DNA evidence,

handwriting analysis, and compositional evidence but not confession evidence,

matching evidence (e.g., fiber, hair) or toxicological analysis.


29/41

Potential Negative "CSI effect" relates to its effect on criminals. Concerns

have been raised that criminal investigation shows educate criminals on

how avoid getting caught for their crimes.

There is an account of one criminal in Ohio, Jermaine "Maniac"McKinney, who allegedly used bleach to wash blood from his hands,

covered his getaway car with blankets to avoid the transfer of blood,

burned the bodies and his clothing, and "removed his cigarette butts -

which would contain his DNA - from the crime scene" after a double

murder.

Copycat Behavior - Perhaps those who watch these crime dramas may

be more likely to learn techniques and engage in copycat behavior;

however, this is purely speculative, as no empir ical research on

copycat cr imes due to cr ime invest igat ion shows has been

conducted.


30/41

Disclaimer - Due to concerns by prosecuting attorneys, some prosecutors have

recommended that crime shows should have a disclaimer at the beginning of

each episode, warning that these shows are fantasy and not reality.

Mistakes should also be shown - A second recommendation is that one of the

crime shows should have an episode in which mistakes in the crime lab are

made, or in which jurors are making unreasonable demands regarding forensic

evidence. The purpose of such an episode is to demonstrate to potential jurors

that such issues occur in actual criminal investigations and trials.

Curative Instruction By Judges - Another recommendation is to have the judge

provide jurors with curative instructions before deliberations, reminding them that

they should not use outside standards such as those used in these forensic

crime investigation shows.

However, research on curative instructions suggests that this reminder probablywill not have its desired effect. Many psychological studies suggest that jurors

are often unable to comply with a judge's curative instructions, and that such an

order may lead to a "backfire effect" in which jurors are more likely to rely on

the very thing the judge advised them to ignore.


31/41

V. Legal Dilemmas

A. New Technology and Exonerations

More sophisticated DNA profiling and other forensic techniques are

being developed all the time, and these technologies allow the

courts to more accurately pursue charges in criminal trials. These

new technologies also affect those already placed behind bars

based upon faulty forensics or on the basis of eyewitness testimony

alone.

Innocence Project - Their main goal is to use DNA evidence to

exonerate innocent people; thus far they have succeeded in freeing

hundreds who have been wrongly convicted.

QUESTION:

How should the courts handle appeals filed on the basis of these

new technologies, which may show these men and women are in

fact innocent


32/41

House v. Bell, was recently decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. Paul House was

sentenced to death for the 1985 murder of his neighbor. One piece of evidence in

the case was semen found on the nightgown of the victim; testing at the time

showed that this semen came from a secretor of the same general type as the

defendant. However, DNA tests which were not available in 1986, the time of thetrial, recently showed that this semen came from the victim's husband, and not the

defendant. Though other circumstantial evidence still linked him to the case,

including fiber evidence, a number of witnesses gave conflicting testimony

regarding the alibis of both House and the victim's husband.

However, House wished to file a new appeal in his case, given this new evidence,

though he previously exhausted his appeals.

The issue at hand in this case was whether this DNA test which served as

"powerful new evidence" was enough to grant him a new hearing and reopen the

case.

Held: In early June 2006, the Supreme Court granted him a new appeal,suggesting that if this DNA evidence was presented to the jury in the original trial

in combination with the conflicting witness testimony, they may have acquitted

him. However, the Supreme Court did not exonerate House of his crime,

arguing that though the new evidence did meet the standards to grant a new

trial, it was not enough to release him.


33/41

Schlup v. Delo set the standard for granting a new trial based

upon the discovery of new evidence. The Supreme Court

ruled in Schlup that a convicted murderer could receive anew trial if he was able to show that, if this evidence had

come to light during the original trial,"it is more likely than

not that no reasonable juror would have found [him] guilty

beyond a reasonable doubt."

A federal appeals court ruled that House did not meet the

standard established in Schlup; however, the Supreme

Court, which overruled the lower court's decision, decided

that House could file another appeal. This case isimportant because it is the first time that the Supreme Court

has "agreed to examine a case involving post-conviction

appeals based on DNA testing."


34/41

NEW PROBLEMS:

1. If Appeals are not granted - Appeals based upon DNA and other new

technological evidence presents the court with a complicated problem. If

the courts decide that no appeals may be filed based upon newtechnologies, then states risk executing innocent people who were

previously convicted on faulty evidence.

2. If Appeals are granted - If the Court allows these appeals, states then riska:

A. More extended trials and appeals processes, which may continue for years,

B. Huge costs to the legal system.

C. More Appeals - As new technologies continue to be developed, those already

convicted may then have the right to ask for more and more appeals;

This is but one of the complicated questions the legal system must soon

answer:

Where might such a cycle end?


35/41

B. The Admissibility of Scientific and Technical Evidence

Judges - Deciding which scientific and technical evidence is admissible in trials has

become the responsibility of trial judges.

Frye v. United States in 1923 - The standard states that scientific evidence can be

admitted at trial but the method used "must be sufficiently established to have

gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs." "In 1976, the

Federal Rules of Evidence [hereinafter FRE] were adopted," and Rule 702 of the

FRE stated that an expert with scientific, specialized, or technical knowledge

qualified as an expert by training, experience, skill, or education may testify to

assist the trier of fact.

"In 1993, the Supreme Court opinion in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals,

Inc. modified the standard for the admissibility of expert testimony in federal

courts."

The court sought a middle ground between the Frye standard of general

acceptability that was perceived as too rigid and the FRE standard which was seenas too liberal.

The Daubert standard encouraged judges to determine the admissibility of

"scientific evidence based on the methodology used and not the conclusions

derived by the researcher;" however, the majority of judges are not trained to make

determinations about the quality of methodology.


36/41

The Daubert standard allows judges to use a number of factors applied

to the facts of the case to determine admissibility of scientific evidence;

1. Testability of the knowledge;

2. Whether the theory or technique has been subjected to peer review,3. The known or potential error rate,

4. General acceptance in the scientific community.

Preliminary technologies - Unallowable at trial.

QUESTIONS Brought About by New Technologies:

1. Should such preliminary evidence simply be ignored until it has met

the four factors for Daubert admissibility?

2. Should the legal system postpone the defendant's trial until such

evidence does meet admissibility standards?


37/41

C. Privacy Rights Threatened By New Technologies

ETHICAL CONCERNS - More recently, arrestee-testing laws were enacted

which allowed law enforcement agencies to take the DNA of those charged withfelonies, even though not yet convicted. The federal government and seven

states currently allow the practice, and more states are considering similar plans.

If the defendant is acquitted or the charges against him or her dropped, the

profile is expunged from the DNA database and the biological sample is

destroyed.

However, as long as the profile is in the database, it still can be matched to other

crimes. With these changes in the system, concerns have been expressed that

the government will not impose limits on whose DNA they take and that soon

those who are arrested for any crime, no matter how minor, may be required to

submit to DNA testing.

EXPLOITATION (used for other things)- Several questions are raised by the use

of DNA databases to connect potential perpetrators to crimes. Currently, only law

enforcement agencies have access to these databases, and this access is

dependent on their own legislative or legal requirements;


38/41

QUESTIONS TO PUNDER:

1. Might access to these databases change in the future?

2. Could the information contained in these databases be exploited or

used in illegal or unethical ways?

3. Might the government not stop at requiring DNA tests of those

arrested?

4. Might they some day require this submission of all its citizens?

Function Creep - Several civi l l ibert ies and Con st i tut ion al issu es

arise with such a broadening of their authority, as does the potential for

abuse. Further, some people are concerned with how these DNAdatabases may one day be used for other things;this is called "function

creep" - informal laws may one day be changed to allow outside

companies, such as health insurance providers, access to the

information.


39/41

VI. CONCLUSIONS

Technological advances have dramatically affected the court system. Some of

these effects have been beneficial, for example, by freeing the innocent and

confirming that the correct person was punished.

Despite these benefits, technology has also brought about legal dilemmas,

such as whether these recent policy changes violate a defendant's privacy and

place restrictions on personal freedoms.

Another legal dilemma is that such technologies can in fact be erroneous; evenestablished techniques, such as fingerprint matching, have recently met with

criticism.

There is also concern that juries have begun to place too much reliance on

scientific evidence, without considering flaws in the techniques or in crime lab

processing.

Finally, courts are faced with the dilemma that a person could be put to death,

but later technology proves that he or she was innocent.

This report has explored both the positives and negatives of these new

technologies, how they have changed the legal system for better and for worse,

and what kinds of complicated legal questions they produce.


40/41

As new technologies continue to be utilized in and by the courts, care will

need to be taken to see that such advances do not infringe upon

defendants' rights.

Those who recognize the slippery slope of such technologies, such asDNA databases, need to voice their concerns so that we can ensure their

proper, legal usage.

Additionally, new technologies discovered post-conviction and which are

still in the preliminary stages will further complicate the legal landscape.The courts will have more complicated decisions to make.

Yet another new phenomenon for the courts to consider is that of the CSI

effect.

While prosecutors fear that jurors who watch CSI: Crime Scene

Investigation will be skeptical of any trial that does not contain clearly

convincing scientific evidence, early research suggests the opposite; that

is, jurors that watch crime dramas actually revere scientific evidence and

are prone to voting guilty if such evidence is presented at trial.


41/41

This is of concern because not only is forensic science depicted as fast

and infallible, but real life limitations of the evidence and human errors at

the crime labs are ignored.

There is no doubt that the advancement of technology has improved thefunctioning and reliability of the legal system. However, with these

positive advancements came a variety of new issues, such as the CSI

effect and laboratory errors.

With new technologies being developed all the time, the courts are goingto be forced to make many difficult decisions regarding their proper

usage and the preservation of personal freedoms.

It is hoped that the legal system as a whole will use proper caution when

making decisions about the uses of these new technologies and theirtreatments in the legal system.

THE END!

legal medicine midterm powerpoint

Documents