8127/frame/fm

 
B.
Forensic Science and the Law
Although the definition of forensic science may be debated, the relationship
of forensic science to the law is clear. Without the judicial system, the crim-
inalist has no function. The job of the analyst is to provide scientific infor-
mation to the legal community and, in doing so, to translate the story the
evidence has to tell. The scientific analysis is only performed at the behest of
someone seeking to introduce the evidence into a court of law. This could
be an investigator or the prosecuting attorney. It could also be the defendant
through a defense attorney. The evidence comes to the forensic analyst
because someone has deemed it relevant to the reconstruction of an event
in time, an event that is associated with a suspected crime.
The frequently opposing aims of science and law must be acknowledged
before they can be surmounted. While the scientist is trained to be objective
to the point of skepticism, and to present alternative explanations equally,
the U.S. legal system is constructed around a system of advocacy. The pros-
ecution is expected to strongly argue the case that she at least believes to be
the truth, and the defense attorney is required to strongly advocate for his
client and may elect to emphasize the interpretation that best supports his
position. These contradictory goals frequently make for an uneasy alliance
between science and law, with both representatives battling to maintain their
own professional ethics. Each case presents these challenges anew.
 
1.
What Is the Question?
If you don’t ask the right question, you won’t get the right answer, no matter
how brilliant your analysis. Although that aphorism could describe most
situations in life, its consequence becomes excruciatingly clear when applied
to a case investigation. Asking the right question will be a continuing theme
throughout this book.