Why is the “real” CSI in trouble?

In real life, law enforcement labs perform the same tests all over the county.  (With the exception that many of the scientists aren’t as beautiful as the actors on TV!)  The commission intended to make sure that techniques used in the federal government (and others) were up-to-date and as accurate as possible.  The commission included scientists, judges, and lawyers.

In contrast, last April Jeff Sessions, the U.S. Attorney General, scrapped the commission.  He promised to set up a similar group inside the Justice Department.  See article: https://qz.com/954391/the-sessions-justice-department-is-nixing-the-national-commission-on-forensic-science/  

Because of this move, the “real” CSI faces trouble.  The important fact of the commission was its independence to do research and develop new standards.  (As far as I know, Mr. Sessions has not set up a similar body within the Justice Department, anyway)

Why dismantling the commission is bad

Consequently, here are 4 reasons why the real CSI faces trouble and so do we as citizens:

1. The commission’s independence gave it the opportunity to present the best techniques—not those that may be preferred by politicians or lobbying groups.
2. Some people in our country discredit scientific evidence—just because it’s scientific and they don’t agree with the findings.  This is dangerous for all Americans.  When people are tried in court using evidence of hair samples, bite marks, or fingerprints, for instance, we all need the most accurate and truthful scientific (forensic) testing to prove guilt (or not).
3. The courtroom remains an adversarial process.  If the forensic testing fails to be accurate, defense attorneys will, rightfully, challenge it and win.  That leaves victims without justice.
4. Many of the techniques used on CSI have really taken years to develop to a level of scientific accuracy that is required.  A good example is DNA testing.  Today, we take it for granted, but in the 1980s the testing was first introduced.  It was not dependable and accurate.  It took decades of improvement (and input from scientists, judges, and lawyers) for DNA testing to achieve its present status.

The value of a TV show like CSI makes Americans aware of the big role that forensic evidence plays in making our justice system as truthful and fair as possible.  Today, as a result, the real CSI faces trouble—and so do we!

The post The “Real” CSI Faces Trouble—and So Do We appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

Because of the expense involved in setting up and running crime labs, there usually aren’t many in any state.  The same is true of trained doctors to work as medical examiners.  In Minnesota where I practice criminal law, there are three crime labs.  Minneapolis (the largest city), Hennepin County (the largest county), and the state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension are the only three crime labs.  And only the largest counties can afford to hire and maintain trained medical examiners.

Although crime labs and medical examiners work together, they have different roles.  The crime lab will work on the physical evidence found at the crime scene.  The medical examiner will concentrate on the dead body found at the crime scene.  The labs can test for finger prints, footprints, fiber analysis, blood stains, tire tracks, firearm identification, bullet analysis, and, of course, DNA.  Medical examiners will use the following techniques in their work:

1.  Autopsy of the dead body

2.  Try to make a positive identification of the body

3.  Establish a cause of death to the victim

4.  Use science to determine the time of death.

Before I go into each of these steps, the history of medical examiners is funny in many ways.  In the 1200’s in England, the king established a “death tax.”  Today, we still retain that but now we call it an “estate tax.  It means the king would receive a tax payment based on the value of the dead person’s assets or estate.  Of course, many wealthy families tried to avoid this by hiding the dead body.  The king relied upon the county sheriffs to find the body and report back to the king.  Unfortunately, the sheriffs were often friends with the family and would give the king wrong information.

The kings decided to hire their own help and called them coroners, after the Latin word for crown.  The coroners found the bodies and determined if the person was really dead and how they died.  That way, the kings could collect the appropriate taxes.

In the new country of America, we adopted the same system of coroners, most of them elected in each county.  The problem was, like those in England, many of them weren’t trained to do the job.  They could be farmers, mechanics, carpenters, and maybe even young people.  (The youngest coroner in the United States was 18)  By the 1800s it was obvious the system wasn’t working well.  Instead of checking on dead people for taxes, now the job had become one of deciding the cause of death—was it an accident, natural causes, or was it murder?  So, by 1860 many states required that the coroner be a medical doctor.

Today, almost all states have laws that require the coroner (since named the Medical Examiner) to be a trained, forensic pathologist.  However, in Kentucky, they still have a constitutional requirement that the coroner cannot be elected if the candidate “has ever fought a duel.”

Next post, we’ll look at the work of a medical examiner.

The post What Do Medical Examiners Do? Part I appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.