Chapter 2 - The stakeholders in forensic science: Roles, perspectives, and expectations

Abstract

The criminal justice system has a number of stakeholders, each with different expectations of the criminal justice system and forensic science. Regardless of the perspective of the stakeholders, all of them meet on the common ground of the court of law. To members of the legal community—including attorneys, judges, and jurors—forensic science is frequently viewed as a means to an end. After all, the physical forensic evidence and the scientific principles used to analyze the samples collected from a crime scene are the mechanisms through which many criminal cases are tried. Forensic evidence and the techniques used to study these samples make up the gist of the forensic knowledge presented in a criminal trial, and they are considered by its practitioners to be routine casework. This and other information are presented in court to assist the trier of fact. To the prosecutor, forensic science is the apparatus used to inculpate a defendant. To the defense attorney, forensic science is the adversary to whom a fatal blow must be struck. To the judge, forensic science is the scale on which guilt or innocence is weighted. To jurors, forensic science is a critical tool for decision making. To members of the law enforcement community, forensic science is the vehicle through which leads and theories are confirmed. Forensic science as a discipline is cheapened by the promulgation and reinforcement of the perception that it is a lesser science or merely a technique with no guiding philosophy; resources of all kinds—from grants to budgets to public confidence—are reduced by the devaluation of the science in forensic science.