Application of Science in Forensic Studies

Introduction

The scientific method is the method used by scientists as an investigation technique. This is used by many researchers to investigate the natural and physical phenomena in this world we live in. When the scientist is in the process of creating a theory, however human errors are going to corrupt the end results. This error is due to the setting of the human personal and cultural beliefs that will interfere with the ending interpretations of the set hypothesis, To fix the mistakes of the developed theory; the scientific method procedures are developed with the integration of decisive factor and standard procedures. The person certified to carry out the scientific methods in forensics is known as a forensic examiner. A forensic examiner is very skilled with the knowledge on how to apply the scientific methods to come up with professional conclusions that are free of flaws.

A scientific examiner helps in reducing the human aspects of prejudice and bias during the consideration of the set theories and hypothesis. For many years, the scientific method was not used in forensic science because it was argued that forensic science deals with past events and the past events possess qualities that the scientific methods and its procedures could not handle. The qualities of these recent events are that past events cannot be observed due to their executed nature. Past events cannot be predicted or deduced from physical evidence and could not be subjected under scientific experiments. However, under careful consideration and slight modifications, the scientific methods are now used in forensic science and incorporated into the criminal investigation science (Becker, 2009).

Observation and description of a phenomenon or a group of phenomena

The first step in the scientific method is the observation and description of a phenomenon or a group of phenomena. The forensic examiner starts with the task of analyzing the crime scene and observing all of the evidence that is left at the crime scene. If it’s a murder investigation, the first step would be to investigate the cause of death and determine where the shooting was conducted and where the victim had been killed. If the crime involved a weapon or a dangerous object, then the forensic examiner will request officers to try and locate the location of the gun. Other observations of the phenomena that are evident at the scene of the crime could help put up a strong case in a court of law. The observations are crucial because observations could end up in determining whether the suspects are to go scot-free or be charged. This is the legal system that deals with proof and evidence, not mere theories (Miller, 2003). Forensic examiners must present to the courts the proof of what they have discovered, some forensic examiners are summoned to testify in court to identified what they observe during the investigation. The forensic examiner will provide pictures, graphs, and written reports to the courts .

Formulation of a hypothesis or hypotheses to explain the phenomena

The second step in the scientific method in forensic science is the formulation of logical hypothesis or hypotheses to explain the phenomena (Science Buddies, 2010). The forensic examiner has to formulate a logical and reasonable hypothesis that could explain the phenomena. This is performed through the framing of valid questions that would highlight or state on the current situation. The forensic examiner could also formulate a theory that could give possible explanations for what happened at the crime scene. The potential theories in a firearm case would be to have a theory of the type of gun that could have fired the bullet found at the crime scene, the possible location of the actual scene of the crime if the victim’s body had been moved. The observations stage and the building of a hypothesis forms an intricate cause and effect connection, with the observation being the effect and the hypothesis and or theory being the most probable cause to the effect. If the victim was murdered, they must find every theory on where the victim was shot, their theory must fall in line with the same theory the detectives have. If the detective theory doesn’t match the theory of the forensic examiner, the evidence must be able to proof their theory.

Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to quantitatively predict the results of new observations

The next step that the forensic examiner would follow would be the use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations (Science Buddies, 2010). The forensic examiner has the task of conducting a study on background information concerning the given case. Naturally, there is bound to be a research or several that is similar or related to the case in question. The forensic examiner has the task of coming up with a literature review of the on previous research that other scientists had conducted in the past that had relations with this particular case. It is not prudent for any research to start from scratch, as it would lead to a lot of time wasting. This is through the investigation and justification of facts that had already been dealt with before. Humans have a pattern when researching on human activities. The research on another related case could provide great insight on the case. drug related cases might have many similarities, however the detective and the forensic examiner must have a hypothesis that the victim is a drug dealer or was a by stander. The victim’s criminal record will be able to let the forensic examiner and detective know if this case was drug related. If they have determine it was drug related they must investigate if there victim had any rival gangs or enemies.

Performance of tests of predictions by several independent experimenters

The next step that the forensic examiner would follow would be the performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters (Science Buddies, 2010). This step tends to justify or give evidence to the hypothesis or theories that had been forwarded. The results of the experiments could end up either approving or disapproving. This phenomenon highlights the need for the setting up of several separate and independent experimenters. This is to avoid the experts’ bias and prejudice from being reflected on the results. If the forensic expert who made up the hypothesis and possible theories were left to conduct the experiments alone, then he or she would be biased into proving the set hypothesis and theories rather than disapproving them. A control group ought to be set to compare or contrast with the results obtained in the experiments. This would help in the ascertainment of the results of the experiments to be true and not prejudiced. Forensics involves the application of scientific methodology in the legal field. Forensics involves the careful examination of a scene of a crime and extracting all the relevant evidence that could be used in a court of law to either implicate or exonerate a particular suspect from a case. This highlights the importance of forensic science in the world and the legal system in particular. There is, therefore, the need for the establishment of a detailed procedure that is to dictate the procedures followed in the observation of crime scenes and the analysis of forensic evidence and technology. This is to ensure that the results obtained are credible and are free of bias and prejudice.

Conclusion

The efficiency of the system also dictates the duration of the legal case and as it goes justice delayed is justice denied. There is also the need for competent forensic experts who can follow the set guidelines professionally and apply intelligent reasoning. The scientific method is incorporated into forensic science and criminology to come with factual conclusions through the careful observation of the evidence. The findings are mostly used in a court of law to aide in the exoneration of a suspect or his sentencing. The observations are later documented and stored for future reference purposes (Faigman, Kaye, Saks & Sanders, 1997).forensic helps all cases in court determine who is guilty and not guilty, however it is a tool not used in many countries that lack the ability to make cases. A lot of people go to jail without a fair trial, some people are found guilty just by eye witness statements. In the past 20 years forensic science have set a lot of people free who were convicted of a crime they never committed after they used DNA to identify they were not the suspects at all.