Flawed Evidence and the Role of Forensic Medicine in Miscarriages of Justice

Zoyalla Kim^*
*Correspondence: Zoyalla Kim, Department of Forensic Psychiatry, University of Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland, Email:

Introduction

Wrongful convictions, wherein innocent individuals are sentenced to prison for crimes they did not commit, are a troubling reality within the criminal justice system. Forensic medicine, which involves the application of medical knowledge to legal matters, has both contributed to these injustices and played a pivotal role in rectifying them. This article explores the multifaceted impact of forensic medicine on wrongful convictions and the subsequent exonerations of the wrongly accused. Forensic evidence, ranging from DNA analysis to fingerprint matching, is often presented as incontrovertible proof of guilt. However, misinterpretations, contamination and human errors in the forensic process can lead to wrongful convictions. The reliance on flawed or misunderstood forensic evidence has been a significant contributor to the miscarriage of justice. Expert witnesses play a crucial role in presenting forensic evidence in court. However, biases, lack of standardization in forensic practices and the pressure to align with prosecution theories can result in inaccurate testimony. This can sway the opinions of jurors and contribute to the wrongful conviction of innocent individuals [1,2].

Description

The advent of DNA analysis has been a game-changer in both convicting the guilty and exonerating the innocent. DNA testing can conclusively link or exclude individuals from crime scenes, providing a level of accuracy previously unattainable. Numerous exonerations have been facilitated by post-conviction DNA testing, underscoring the importance of this technology in rectifying past mistakes. As forensic science evolves, authorities are increasingly reexamining past convictions. This involves the application of modern forensic techniques to evidence from earlier cases, uncovering flaws and errors that may have contributed to wrongful convictions. Such reviews have led to a growing number of exonerations and highlighted the need for ongoing scrutiny of forensic practices [3].

Forensic medicine, while prone to contributing to wrongful convictions, has also become a powerful tool in rectifying these miscarriages of justice. The advancements in DNA analysis and the ongoing scrutiny of past cases demonstrate the evolving nature of forensic science. To mitigate wrongful convictions, it is crucial to address issues such as misinterpretation of evidence, expert testimony biases and implement standardized forensic practices. Only through a commitment to accuracy and accountability can forensic medicine continue to evolve as a force for justice in the criminal justice system.Insufficient training in forensic science among law enforcement and forensic professionals can contribute to errors in evidence collection and analysis. Addressing this challenge requires ongoing education and training programs to ensure that those involved in forensic processes are wellequipped with the latest methodologies and best practices [4].

The lack of standardized procedures in forensic practices can lead to inconsistencies and discrepancies in evidence interpretation. Establishing and enforcing standardized protocols for evidence collection, analysis and presentation in court is essential to enhance the reliability and credibility of forensic evidence. Collaboration between forensic experts, legal professionals and scientists from various disciplines is crucial to improving the accuracy of forensic investigations. Interdisciplinary teams can bring diverse perspectives to the analysis of evidence, reducing the risk of bias and enhancing the overall integrity of the forensic process. Embracing emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and advanced imaging techniques, can further enhance the capabilities of forensic medicine. These technologies can provide more accurate and objective analyses, reducing the likelihood of errors and contributing to the identification of the actual perpetrators [5].

Conclusion

As forensic science continues to evolve, its role in the criminal justice system must align with principles of accuracy, transparency and accountability. By learning from past mistakes, embracing technological innovations and fostering collaboration, forensic medicine can contribute to a fair and just legal system that minimizes the occurrence of wrongful convictions.

Acknowledgment

None.

Conflict of Interest

There is no conflict of interest associated with this manuscript.

References

1. Olver, Mark E., Craig S. Neumann, Stephen CP Wong and Robert D. Hare. "The structural and predictive properties of the psychopathy checklist–revised in Canadian aboriginal and non-aboriginal offenders." Psychol Assess 25 (2013): 167.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

2. Deist, Timo M., Frank JWM Dankers, Gilmer Valdes and Robin Wijsman, et al. "Machine learning algorithms for outcome prediction in (chemo) radiotherapy: An empirical comparison of classifiers." Med Phys 45 (2018): 3449-3459.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

3. Currie, Geoff, K. Elizabeth Hawk, Eric Rohren and Alanna Vial, et al. "Machine learning and deep learning in medical imaging: Intelligent imaging." J Med Imaging Radiat Sci 50 (2019): 477-487.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

4. Coid, Jeremy, Min Yang, Simone Ullrich and Amanda Roberts, et al. "Prevalence and correlates of psychopathic traits in the household population of Great Britain." Int J Law Psychiatry 32 (2009): 65-73.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

5. Hare, Robert D. and Craig S. Neumann. "Psychopathy: Assessment and forensic implications." Can J Psychiatry 54 (2009): 791-802.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at