"This is one of the most brutal, heinous and upsetting things I've ever seen in my 27 years of law enforcement. Not only the crime scene, but the disregard for common decency toward human beings." Joliet Illinois Police Chief Mike Trafton stated. Three people were robbed, brutally killed and dismembered for no apparent reason. Police said when they found the bodies, three other people were in the house playing video games and showing no remorse at all. Although all crime scenes can be tough to deal with, some crime scenes will stay in a forensic scientist’s mind for years and can cause them to have nightmares and can have emotional effects that last a lifetime.
A forensic scientist is someone who helps lawyers, jurors, and judges understand …show more content…
In addition, they handle many different dangerous chemicals and bodily fluids that could be contaminated or harmful if touched or inhaled. Handling these outside of the lab could be more dangerous because in the lab the samples are stored in sterile containers (Risks of Being a Forensic Technician). If the chemicals are mixed improperly it could cause an explosion or fire could occur. In addition, bodily fluids could be found at the site of the body, or a few feet/yards away from the crime scene, which may pose hazardous problems while trying to collect them. Forensic scientists must take precautions such as wearing protective clothing and gloves in order to protect themselves from bodily fluids and chemicals. Weapons could also be a potential health hazard to a person examining them in the lab or at the crime scene. Forensic scientists must ensure that they handle the weapon properly to avoid injury, especially from sharp objects such as knives or scissors. For example, a person could be examining a gun and it could misfire and injure them or others that may be around them. They also wear gloves when examining weapons in case the weapon is contaminated with hazardous chemicals or bodily fluids. The forensic scientist must be aware of and take the necessary precautions to protect themselves from any needles/broken glass/other hazardous items at the scene which could injure …show more content…
Testifying against an innocent man is something no forensic scientist wants to do, but it happens more often than people think. Sometimes evidence could be misleading, or inadequate, and could lead to a forensic scientist testifying information which is based on invalid testing or on false information. However, science is not always the reason for wrongful convictions. Even though most police officers and government officials are honest and trustworthy, they are still human and wrongful convictions will still continue to occur (The Innocence Project). They may tamper with the evidence, trick the jury into thinking evidence is more scientific than it actually is, or lie intentionally while on the stand. A suspect may also give a false confession or admission for many different reasons that could lead to the guilt being placed on someone who is truly innocent. The Innocence Project, a group dedicated to exonerating wrongfully convicted individuals through DNA testing and reforming the criminal justice system to prevent future injustice, states that “Too often, forensic analysts’ testimony goes further than the science allows. Many forensic techniques that have been practiced for years – without the benefit of sufficient scientific research – are accepted and repeated as fact. Juries are left with the impression that the evidence is more scientific than it is, and
A forensic scientist is someone who helps lawyers, jurors, and judges understand …show more content…
In addition, they handle many different dangerous chemicals and bodily fluids that could be contaminated or harmful if touched or inhaled. Handling these outside of the lab could be more dangerous because in the lab the samples are stored in sterile containers (Risks of Being a Forensic Technician). If the chemicals are mixed improperly it could cause an explosion or fire could occur. In addition, bodily fluids could be found at the site of the body, or a few feet/yards away from the crime scene, which may pose hazardous problems while trying to collect them. Forensic scientists must take precautions such as wearing protective clothing and gloves in order to protect themselves from bodily fluids and chemicals. Weapons could also be a potential health hazard to a person examining them in the lab or at the crime scene. Forensic scientists must ensure that they handle the weapon properly to avoid injury, especially from sharp objects such as knives or scissors. For example, a person could be examining a gun and it could misfire and injure them or others that may be around them. They also wear gloves when examining weapons in case the weapon is contaminated with hazardous chemicals or bodily fluids. The forensic scientist must be aware of and take the necessary precautions to protect themselves from any needles/broken glass/other hazardous items at the scene which could injure …show more content…
Testifying against an innocent man is something no forensic scientist wants to do, but it happens more often than people think. Sometimes evidence could be misleading, or inadequate, and could lead to a forensic scientist testifying information which is based on invalid testing or on false information. However, science is not always the reason for wrongful convictions. Even though most police officers and government officials are honest and trustworthy, they are still human and wrongful convictions will still continue to occur (The Innocence Project). They may tamper with the evidence, trick the jury into thinking evidence is more scientific than it actually is, or lie intentionally while on the stand. A suspect may also give a false confession or admission for many different reasons that could lead to the guilt being placed on someone who is truly innocent. The Innocence Project, a group dedicated to exonerating wrongfully convicted individuals through DNA testing and reforming the criminal justice system to prevent future injustice, states that “Too often, forensic analysts’ testimony goes further than the science allows. Many forensic techniques that have been practiced for years – without the benefit of sufficient scientific research – are accepted and repeated as fact. Juries are left with the impression that the evidence is more scientific than it is, and