Forensic evidence is often regarded as one of the most powerful forms of evidence available in many criminal cases. Even so, forensic evidence is not infallible, and you may be able to challenge it. Your attorney should review any forensic evidence in your case and determine the best way to handle it.
Forensic evidence may be challenged if it was improperly collected or obtained. Many forensic specimens must be handled delicately to prevent contamination before testing. We might instead challenge the credentials of forensic experts who testify about evidence. Even if we cannot prevent forensic evidence from being introduced in court, we can highlight its shortcomings and present our own experts and evidence to counter the prosecution’s claims. Often, forensic evidence is not definitive and only proves one small element of the case. In the grand scheme of things, that small proof might not amount to much.
Get a private, free case assessment by calling our Salt Lake City criminal defense attorneys at Overson & Bugden at (801) 758-2287.
Challenging Forensic Evidence Based on How it Was Collected
Forensic evidence can be very sensitive. Genetic material, such as blood, hair, or bodily fluids, must be carefully collected to prevent crime scene investigators from damaging or contaminating the sample. If forensic evidence is collected improperly, the integrity of the evidence may be compromised.
For example, when collecting blood samples, investigators must use gloves or other protective gear to protect themselves and the evidence. If our Park City criminal defense attorneys learn that blood or other genetic material was collected in a way that created a high risk of contamination, we can challenge the trustworthiness of the evidence.
It is also possible that forensic evidence was seized illegally. For example, if the police enter your private property without a warrant to take a hair sample from you to test against samples found at a crime scene, the evidence may be tainted and inadmissible in court.
Utah Rules for the Admissibility of Expert Evidence
There are specific rules for how expert evidence and testimony is reviewed and deemed admissible in court. In Utah, expert evidence falls under Rule 702 of the Utah Rules of Evidence.
According to the rule, a witness who is deemed a qualified expert because of their skills, knowledge, training, experience, or education may testify and render an opinion if their scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge may help the trier of fact understand the evidence.
Such expert knowledge may serve as the basis of expert testimony only if there is a threshold showing that the methods or principles underlying the testimony are reliable, based on sufficient data or facts, and have been reliably applied to the facts.
These threshold requirements may be deemed satisfied if methods or principles employed by the expert witness are generally accepted in the relevant expert community.
Challenging Qualification of Forensic Expert Witnesses
Forensic evidence is often scientific and complicated. The average person, including many legal professionals, has a hard time understanding what forensic evidence really means. As such, forensic expert witnesses are often necessary.
If prosecutors try to use unqualified expert witnesses, we can challenge them in court. Experts must be qualified, and we can make the prosecution prove the expert’s qualifications.
If the expert witness is unqualified, we can challenge their testimony. If the court agrees, the expert may not be permitted to testify as an expert. If prosecutors cannot find another expert with the right qualifications, they might be unable to use the evidence at all.
How to Highlight the Shortcomings of Forensic Evidence
Forensic evidence often has various shortcomings. If we can identify these shortcomings and highlight them in court, we may be able to undermine the case against you.
We should consider what the evidence proves versus what it implies. For example, if forensic evidence shows that your fingerprints were at the crime scene, this only proves that you were at the scene at some point before investigators arrived. It only implies that you could have been involved in the crime, but it does not prove it definitively.
We should also consider whether the forensic testing results are trustworthy. If testing is inconclusive or unreliable, we can urge the jury not to rely on it when they deliberate. We may have our own expert test the same evidence, if testing is necessary, or review the reports from the prosecutor’s expert. It I possible that the results are inconclusive or flat out wrong.
Looking for Breaks in the Chain of Custody of Forensic Evidence
All evidence, including forensic evidence, must be carefully handled and maintained. Evidence must be securely stored by the authorities. If anyone checks the evidence out, it must be logged, and the location of the evidence must always be accounted for. Often, this information is logged right on evidence bags, folders, tags, and other containers or markers. It is also often maintained in logs kept by the police and testing labs. If the chain of custody I broken, we might challenge the evidence.
The chain of custody refers to the record of who has the evidence. If the chain is broken, the whereabouts of the evidence might be totally unknown, and who knowns what happens to it. If and when it is found, it should not be trusted. It might have been altered, and there may be no way of knowing who did it.
Limitations of Forensic Evidence in Utah Criminal Cases
Forensic evidence may be more limited than people realize. As mentioned before, it may prove one small fact of the case, but this fact alone might not be enough to prove guilt.
For example, the fact that your fingerprints were found at the scene of a crime does not prove you committed the crime. It only proves that you were at that location at some point in the past. In many cases, defendants’ fingerprints are at the scene of a crime for a good reason. They might frequent that location or even live there.
Even if we cannot disprove forensic evidence, we might show how it is irrelevant or very weak. A blood sample might show your blood type matches the blood found at a crime scene, but this proves almost nothing, as many people share the same blood type.
Even DNA evidence can be challenged if there is a logical, non-criminal reason why your DNA would be found at the crime scene.
Common Examples of Forensic Evidence
Forensic evidence encompasses a broad spectrum of information that requires specialized scientific methods to collect and analyze.
Common examples of forensic evidence include genetic material. Blood, hair, and various bodily fluids might be used as forensic evidence. Scientific testing may reveal the origin of the genetic material, potentially implicating someone in the crime.
Even fingerprints, which have been used as evidence for decades, are considered a form of forensic evidence. Some of the strongest forensic evidence is DNA, which may be extracted from numerous sources. Even so, DNA might not prove who committed a crime, but only that someone was present at a particular location.
Get Legal Help from Our Utah Criminal Defense Attorneys
Get a private, free case assessment by calling our Provo, UT criminal defense attorneys at Overson & Bugden at (801) 758-2287.
