ABSTRACT
The modern forensic science laboratory has come a long way since the world was introduced to trace evidence collection and examination methods by the investigators’ investigator, Sherlock Holmes. Indeed, the capabilities of the laboratory are brought into everyone’s home on a weekly basis through the series CSI, or from an actual trial on Court TV, and the media. It has been stated that it is possible that some of the jury pools may have been tainted in their perception of what could actually be found at the scene of a crime and the resulting laboratory examination. Specifically, when watching an hour-long CSI segment, the crime is committed, the scene investigated, accurate laboratory examinations conducted on the recovered materials, a subject is identified and taken off the street, end of case, but not necessarily in most “real-world” investigations. Yes, I can point to numerous investigations that have been solved in a very timely fashion, but many, many more that have not, even though the scene was processed in a diligent manner, evidence recovered, and laboratory examinations conducted. However, no subject was identified. Essentially, the public has, in some instances, gotten the misconception that if the laboratory and the crime scene investigator have not identified the person on trial with direct evidence such as a fingerprint or used a specific examination technique, then that person is not guilty of the crime charged. In other words, after seeing CSI or one of the other movies, why did the scene investigator not use an alternate light source (ALS) or
portable explosives detector, make a positive identification, or employ one of the many other evidence collection methods observed on screen? This is not to advocate that an educated public in crime scene investigation and laboratory examination methods is not a positive development. Quite the contrary. The better educated the public or juror, the better the justice that is served. The only qualification is that people should have a realistic expectation of what the laboratory and investigators can, and cannot, do.
