8127/frame/fm

 
Arthur Conan Doyle
 
—A Scandal in Bohemia
 
A.
Scope and Definitions
Any profession, discipline, craft, or art may potentially be invited into the
judicial arena. As criminal activity and creativity grows, and our society
1
8127/frame/ch01 Page 3 Friday, July 21, 2000 11:32 AM

---

4
Principles and Practice of Criminalistics
becomes more litigious, it is not unusual for the court to call upon experts
in the most esoteric of pursuits to provide testimony. While acknowledging
the diversity of expertise that may impinge on legal matters, we will direct
our commentary according to our own area of expertise, the application of
the physical sciences to the solution of crime. Even so, there remains a
discussion of semantics, intent, and, to no small extent, integration of all the
various disciplines that may be called upon in any investigation. Many of the
ideas that we present here most certainly apply to areas beyond strict science,
if for no other reason than the science must integrate with the greater effort
of an investigation. But to begin, we will tackle the classic struggle to define
our territory. Even if you do not agree with the following definitions, at least
you will be able to read the rest of this book without ambiguity.
 
1.
What is Forensic Science; Who Is a Forensic Scientist?
Put three forensic scientists in a room together and ask for an opinion on
any subject — you will receive at least six opinions. If you ask these same
folk — “What is forensic science?” and “Who is a forensic scientist?” — the
number of opinions will increase exponentially. Why should the combination
of two simple words produce such heated debate?
First of all, the noun 
 
forensics
strictly refers to the art of debate. Although
the common origin of the adjective and the noun are obvious (the Latin root
is 
 
forum
, and the court is a place of debate), we distinguish between them in
modern usage. We suggest that the common use of forensics to refer to 
 
forensic
science
unnecessarily obscures an already imprecise term. Our natural ten-
dency to reduce any word to its most simplistic form does not legitimize its use.
The adjective 
 
forensic
simply designates a connection with, or use in,
public discussion and debate or, more specifically, a court of law (
 
Webster’s
,
1996). The use of forensic as an adjective is becoming appropriately common
for practically any activity than might be invited into a courtroom: forensic
art, forensic accounting, forensic knot analysis, and so on. But do these
activities fall into the purview of forensic 
 
science
? Although forensic anthro-
pology, forensic chemistry, forensic medicine, and forensic psychiatry receive
nominal definitions in the 1996 edition of 
 
Webster’s
, 
 
forensic science
is notable
for its absence.
It appears that the 
 
science