Contemporary social issues : edited by Rose Giallombardo. John Wiley & Sons (605 Third Avenue, New York, New York 10016), 1975, 612 pp., paperback — $9.95

Abstract

Forensic science must operate in a legal context. The ultimate result of many scientific analyzes is in a courtroom and the admissibility of this evidence is controlled by rules of evidence. Forensic science is part of the criminal investigation process which starts with the discovery of a crime. It is crucial that crime scene technicians properly recognize, collect, and preserve evidence as it has to be effectively analyzed by forensic scientists. There are Constitutional and other legal constraints on how a criminal investigation can be carried out. These include discovery, search and seizure, protections against self-incrimination, and due process. The production of evidence at a trial is compelled by a subpoena, and order to appear in court. The admissibility of evidence is controlled by a set of rules that govern security of the evidence, authenticity, relevance, and other issues. Scientific evidence is subject to all of these constraints as well as some that apply only to this type of evidence. These constraints arose in part from the decisions in US v. Frye and Daubert v. Merrell-Dow. These cases set out validity and reliability rules for the admission of scientific evidence.When forensic scientists examine evidence, they issue a scientific report. This report must be written to particular standards of accuracy and completeness. In some states, the report is admissible by itself as proof of the facts it contains. Although the same courts handle both civil and criminal cases in the United States, they are different in their scope, rules, and penalties. Discovery is much more liberal in civil cases. The only penalty for violation of civil laws is payment of money to the aggrieved party, whereas in criminal cases, life and liberty are at stake. In both cases, scientists act as expert witnesses, a status that enables them to offer expert opinions in matters within their expertise. Each time a scientist appears in court he or she must be qualified as an expert by the judge.