You’ve likely seen television shows and movies portraying forensics as air-tight ways to uncover who committed a crime. In reality, many types of forensic science aren’t as reliable as you might think. If you’re facing criminal charges in Nebraska, it’s important to know about three highly debated forensic science methods.
Roadside drug tests
Whether you refer to them as field testing kits or roadside drug tests, these items are small pouches that change color if they detect the presence of drugs. The problem is that evidence continues to prove that these tests often return false positives. These tests are so often inaccurate that certain courts are beginning to reject them as evidence.
Studying bloodstain patterns
Popular television shows like CSI and Dexter might make you believe that bloodstain pattern analysis is a tried and true forensic science. Observing bloodstain patterns began around the 1970s and 80s. However, even with advancements in bloodstain analysis, the results of this analysis method remain largely subjective.
Analyzing emergency calls
Another type of evidence you don’t want another party presenting against you in a criminal defense setting is a 911 call analysis. This so-called forensic science purports that experts can recognize a guilty person through their pauses, choice of words, speech patterns and grammar someone uses. According to ProPublica, 911 call analysis is used in over 100 cases spanning 26 states. However, five separate studies have all rebuked that analyzing 911 calls can accurately identify someone’s guilt.
Modern forensic science involves several methods that can lead to false convictions and decades of unjust imprisonment. Until law enforcement uses more reliable systems, the problem of junk forensic science remains a hot-button issue for wrongly convicted individuals.
