During a murder case trial, we often see both the prosecutor and attorney presenting the evidence such as DNA evidence that they have found on the crime scene and eyewitness testimony to the judge before he decided the outcome of the trial. [1] This makes us wonder about the possibility that these DNA evidence and witness testimony could be wrong and which one is more superior compared to the other in solving crime cases. I would like to discuss the value of DNA evidence vs witness Testimony in the next few paragraphs.
DNA evidence refers to DNA samples that are taken from a crime scene to go through processes such as PCR test to determine the probability of this DNA belong to specific individuals. These source of DNA samples came from sweat, …show more content…
Cynthia’s experiment proved that there are 85% chances that Person A are able to pass person B’s DNA into an object after person A Touches Person B for short period of time and in one-fifth of the case, only person B DNA is found as the sole DNA contributor for this object. [4] …show more content…
Before DNA evidence exists, witness testimony is one of the major key players in solving criminal cases. However, people started to questions the reliability of these testimonies. [5] In 1932, Bourchard has reviewed several cases of wrongful convictions which commonly caused by false identification of a suspect. [6] Report from Innocence Project supported this theory, 50% out of 75% overturned convictions due to DNA evidence, is caused by conviction from eyewitness testimony. [7] There are several factors that can reduce the accuracy of witness testimony and one of them is biased. Biased refers to a mindset that is in favour or against a certain group or things compared to the others. For example, some people will have a difficulty in identifying and remembering people of their own race compared to those of a different and less familiar race.
Another factor that can reduce the accuracy of witness testimony is stress. Several experiments have proved that a person under high-stress level will have difficulties in recalling a specific information or even make an accurate identification. Thus, stress is able to impair the memory of a person. With different stress level involved, witnesses from a non-violent crime will be likely to be able to identify and remember specific
DNA evidence refers to DNA samples that are taken from a crime scene to go through processes such as PCR test to determine the probability of this DNA belong to specific individuals. These source of DNA samples came from sweat, …show more content…
Cynthia’s experiment proved that there are 85% chances that Person A are able to pass person B’s DNA into an object after person A Touches Person B for short period of time and in one-fifth of the case, only person B DNA is found as the sole DNA contributor for this object. [4] …show more content…
Before DNA evidence exists, witness testimony is one of the major key players in solving criminal cases. However, people started to questions the reliability of these testimonies. [5] In 1932, Bourchard has reviewed several cases of wrongful convictions which commonly caused by false identification of a suspect. [6] Report from Innocence Project supported this theory, 50% out of 75% overturned convictions due to DNA evidence, is caused by conviction from eyewitness testimony. [7] There are several factors that can reduce the accuracy of witness testimony and one of them is biased. Biased refers to a mindset that is in favour or against a certain group or things compared to the others. For example, some people will have a difficulty in identifying and remembering people of their own race compared to those of a different and less familiar race.
Another factor that can reduce the accuracy of witness testimony is stress. Several experiments have proved that a person under high-stress level will have difficulties in recalling a specific information or even make an accurate identification. Thus, stress is able to impair the memory of a person. With different stress level involved, witnesses from a non-violent crime will be likely to be able to identify and remember specific