Chemistry 113: Forensic ScienceIntroduction

Prof. J. T. Spencer

Adjunct Prof. T. L. Meeks

CHE 113 2

Course DescriptionCourse Description and Prerequisite

Skills: Forensic Science is focused upon the application of scientific methods and techniques to crime and law. Recent advances in scientific methods and principles have had an enormous impact upon law enforcement and the entire criminal justice system. In this course, scientific methods specifically relevant to crime detection and analysis will be presented. No prior chemistry instruction is required or assumed but…

CHE 113 3

Course Description …the course should appeal to those who have also

had high school chemistry. Emphasis is placed upon understanding the science behind the techniques used in evaluating physical evidence. Topics included are blood analysis, organic and inorganic evidence analysis, microscopic investigations, hair analysis, DNA, drug chemistry and toxicology, fiber comparisons, paints, glass compositions and fragmentation, fingerprints, soil comparisons, and arson investigations, among others.

CHE 113 4

Lectures Lectures: The material covered in class meetings

will be illustrative rather than exhaustive. You should read the material in the text or handouts assigned before the class meeting. In class, alternate ways of understanding the material will often be presented. The examinations, however, will cover both the assigned text and lecture materials (whether or not they are specifically covered in class). Plenty of help is available in class meetings to answer questions and provide assistance with problems.

CHE 113 5

Lectures In-Class Materials: The material covered

in class is illustrative rather than exhaustive. You should read the material in the text assigned before the class. In class, alternate ways of understanding the material will often be presented. The examinations, however, will cover both the assigned text and in-class materials (whether or not they are specifically covered in class).

CHE 113 6

Grading Grading and Examinations: Final grades will be

assigned based upon the hourly exams given during each quarter in the regularly scheduled class (50%), the final examination – an average of a midterm in January and a final in June (25 %), and the laboratory grade (25 %) as follows – projects will be counted as exam grades in the quarter in which they are presented;

Hourly Examinations and Projects50 %

Final Examination average25 %

Laboratory25 %

100 %

There will be NO MAKE-UP Examinations.

CHE 113 7

Quarter ProjectsFirst Quarter Project: Forensic Professionals

– Pick any topic in forensic science.  You will be presenting this topic to the class in the form of a 5 minute power point presentation.  The object is to familiarize yourself, as well as your classmates, on this topic.  The power point should include all necessary pictures, drawings, vocabulary etc.  You will provide the narrative.  Remember this is a presentation, you are not using the power point as a teleprompter to read from.  Provide your resources on one of the last slides.  Write 5 test questions on your presentation; either fill-in or short answer style with the answers.

Topic and abstract submission due Friday September 20; TYPED.

Project due date TBA (second week in October)

CHE 113 8

Quarter ProjectsFirst Quarter Project: Forensic Professionals

– Description of profession– How that profession fits into Forensics– What is the degree/credentials needed for that

profession (possible salary)– Are you still interested in this as a profession

• Works cited

CHE 113 9

Quarter Projects

Second Quarter Project: Innocence Project Research and paper– You will be exploring the Innocence Project online and

answering questions as you move through the website. The questions will give you background needed to create an opinion paper concerning the Innocence Project

CHE 113 10

Quarter Projects

Third Marking Period Project:– Drug Project

Topic submission due TBA Projects due TBA

CHE 113 11

Quarter Projects

Fourth Marking Period Project– Mock Trial– Projects due TBA

CHE 113 12

Textbook

Required Textbooks: The required textbook for this course is “The Science of Criminalistics” (Introduction to Forensic Science) by James T. Spencer to be published this year. Since the hardcopy of the text will not be ready by this summer, students can get to the chapters (free as pdfs) at supa.syr.edu and then click on Moodle (bottom of the page).  To logon, they use USERNAME: forensics113 and PASSWORD: Orange113 (no spaces)

CHE 113 13

Laboratory

Laboratory: There will be no Make-Up labs. In order to pass, a student must have a passing grade in the laboratory portion of the course. Attendance in laboratory is mandatory. The laboratory periods are 3 hours in length and, while some experiments will not require the total allotted time for completion, students are expected to arrive promptly at the beginning of the lab period and not leave until that particular experiment is completed and turned in. Students that arrive too late to complete the experiment in the allotted time and those that arrive on time but depart before turning in their lab reports will receive a zero for the experiment.

Chapter 1Introduction, Historic Development, and Legal Roles of Forensic Science

Prof. J. T. Spencer

Adjunct Prof. T. L. Meeks

CHE 113 15

Learning Goals and Objectives

Today, the role of science in the courtroom is undisputed. We rely upon the scientific analysis and interpretation of key evidence to both exonerate and convict. But this hasn’t always been true in history. In this chapter an introduction to the role that forensic science has and does play in criminal justice is presented. Also, the legal underpinnings of the admissibility, use, and limitations of scientific evidence and testimony are explored. In this chapter, you will need to understand the following concepts:

CHE 113 16

Learning Goals and Objectives

What is meant by the terms forensic science and criminalistics

What is the difference between a basic and an applied science

What is the relationship between the law, basic science and applied science

How has forensic science developed throughout history to its present state

What is Locard’s Exchange Principle How has fiction contributed to the development of forensic

science What features do fictional detectives and modern forensic

scientists have in common

CHE 113 17

Learning Goals and Objectives

What is the CSI Effect and how has it influenced scientific evidence in the courtroom

What is meant by the Principle of Individuality How do precedent cases pave the way for scientific

evidence and testimony What are the key features of the Frye and Daubert cases How have the Joiner, Khumo and Melendez-Dias cases

affected expert testimony.

CHE 113 18

Forensic Science

Forensic Science - Application of the scientific method and techniques to law and criminal justice.– Lies at the point of convergence between our

legal and scientific systems– The Law wants certainty– The Science can only establish the simplest of

factEncompasses many fields...

CHE 113 19

Forensic Science

Advances in Forensic Science occur in unexpected leaps rather than small steps– The underlying science has been further developed– Technology has been created– Changes in legal policy or practice

Revolutionary rather than evolutionary

Forensic Science

Scientific Method- real science does not have to follow steps IN ORDER.

CHE 113 21

Forensic Science

Natural Sci: Bio

Medicine

Social Sci.:Psyc., Anth.

Engr

Forensic Science

Law and Enforcement

Physical Sci.Chem, Phys

CHE 113 22

Scientific Evidence in Court

Scientific (Forensic) evidence is aimed at informing the court where it lack expertise.

Assist in determining fact.What is admissible evidence?

– Real Science vs Pseudo (Quack) Science– Established how to determine the difference

through 4 primary cases (Frye, Daubert, Joiner, and Kuhmo)

CHE 113 23

Forensics in Court

How does a lay jury sort out real science from pseudo science?– Until 1923 individual courts could define what was

acceptable as evidence in the courtroom.• Charisma• Ability to convince the jury

The Jury Decides…The Jury Decides…

CHE 113 24

Forensics in Court

1923, polygraph evidence– “…the evidential force of the principle must be

recognized, and while the courts will go a long way in admitting expert testimony deduced from well-recognized scientific principle or discovery, the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have gained general general acceptanceacceptance in the particular field in which it belongs”.

– Sets up the scientific field as the “vaildator” for legal admissibility while court determines if principles are “generally accepted”.

FryeFrye Standard Standard

CHE 113 25

Forensics in CourtWhat is general acceptability?What is general acceptability?

Technique must be accepted by a “meaningful segment of the relevant scientific community” through

• Books

• Papers

• Prior judicial decisions

• Length of existence of technique

– Inflexible (and slow) for new developments or extensions of existing techniques and methods

CHE 113 26

Forensics in CourtDaubertDaubert case case

1993, Birth defects were caused by prenatal ingestion of Bendectin made by Merrill Dow. – The District Court granted Dow summary judgment based on expert

testimony that said that maternal use of Bendectin had not been shown to be a risk factor for human birth defects. Although Daubert had the testimony of eight other experts who based their conclusions that Bendectin can cause birth defects on animal studies, chemical structure analyses, and the unpublished "reanalysis" of human statistical studies, the court determined that this evidence did not meet the applicable "general acceptance" standard for the admission of expert testimony. The Court of Appeals agreed and affirmed, citing Frye.

Supreme Court - The Federal Rules of Evidence, not Frye, provide the Supreme Court - The Federal Rules of Evidence, not Frye, provide the standard for admitting expert scientific testimony in a federal trial.standard for admitting expert scientific testimony in a federal trial.

CHE 113 27

Forensics in CourtWhat are the Federal Rules of Evidence?What are the Federal Rules of Evidence?

Based upon Federal Rules of Evidence (Rule 702) that are more flexible.– “If scientific … knowledge will assist the tryer of

fact to understand evidence or to determine a fact in an issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify…..if”

• It is based upon sufficient fact or data• It is a product of reliable principles and methods• The principles are applied reliably to the facts of the case.

CHE 113 28

Forensics in CourtJudge is the “Gatekeeper”Judge is the “Gatekeeper”

General acceptance of Frye standard not necessary.– Assigns trial judge “gatekeeper” responsibilities in

determining the admissibility and reliability of scientific evidence. (Daubert Hearings)

– More Flexible in admitting new types of data– Relies upon jury (with help from the judge) to

determine value of evidence and the adversarial judicial system (cross-examination of expert witnesses and counter expert witnesses) to refute scientific evidence.

CHE 113 29

Forensics in CourtHow does the judge decide?How does the judge decide?

Guideline for determining value of scientific evidence may include:

• Has the technique or theory been tested• Has the technique or theory been subjected to

peer review• What is the technique’s potential error rate• Existence of standards controlling the

performance of the analysis• Has the theory or method received widespread

acceptance within the appropriate community– Allows for authentic scientific break-throughs

CHE 113 30

Forensics in CourtJoiner Joiner

1995 -Case asserted that PCB’s caused cancer in plaintiff– Tried to establish a causal link between PCB’s and

cancer based upon animal models.– “Conclusions and methodology are not separate.

Experts commonly extrapolate from existing data but nothing requires a court to admit opinion evidence that is connected to the data only by the expert themselves.”

– The court may conclude that there is too great a gap between the data and the opinion.

CHE 113 31

Forensics in CourtKumho TireKumho Tire Case Case

1999 - Tire blowout liability case. – Plaintiff expert wanted to testify that the blowout was

due to defect rather than under-inflation.– Did not allow plaintiff expert testimony since the

“test” by the expert was unreliable and made up by him (i.e., baseball batter designing his own “strike zone”).

– “…make certain that an expert…employs the same level of intellectual rigor that characterizes the practice of an expert in the relevant field.”

– Supreme Court extended Daubert's holding to include non-scientific expert testimony.

Voire Dire…

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/MovieSpeeches/moviespeechmycousinvinny4.html

CHE 113 33

Forensics in Court

Federal Courts use Daubert Standard

Many State Courts use Daubert

About Half of State and Most Local Courts still use Frye.

CHE 113 34

Forensic Science History

Began formally in late 1700’s. Real application of the scientific method and

techniques developed in 1900’s. Important Names:

– Alphonse Bertillion (anthropometry)– Francis Galton (Fingerprinting)– Calvin Goddard (Ballistics)– Alexandre Lacassagne (anthropology)– Edmond Locard (scientific criminal investigation)– Matheau Orfila (toxicology)– Crime Writers: esp. A.C. Doyle, D.L. Sayers, A.Christie

CHE 113 35

Alphonse Bertillion (1853-1914) Physician

and Statistician devised a system of

identification of criminals that relies on 11 bodily measurements and the color of the eyes, hair, and skin

CHE 113 36

Francis Galton (1822-1911)

Anthropologist and

Explorer the author of memoirs on

various anthropometric subjects; he originated the process of composite portraiture, and paid much attention to fingerprints and their employment for the identification of criminals

CHE 113 37

Calvin Goddard (1891-1955)

Pioneer in Forensic Ballistics

brought professionalism, the use of the scientific method, and reliability to Forensic Firearm Identification, at a time when charlatanism was rampant in this field

CHE 113 38

Alexandre Lacassagne (1843-1924)

Professeur de médecine légale à la Faculté de Lyon, Alexandre

Criminal Anthropology

CHE 113 39

Edmond Locard 1877-1966 -

Application of scientific techniques to criminal investigations.

Set up first real forensics lab and developed the first fundamental principle of forensic science

CHE 113 40

Locard’s Exchange Principle

The most basic concept of Forensic Science:– When contact with an object or person occurs, a

cross transfer of evidence occurs• Examples; dust, biological samples, fingerprints,

chemical residues, etc.

– Can be used as evidence based on the Principle of Individuality

• Two objects may be indistinguishable, but no two objects are ever identical. Things can at least be put in classes or even individualized in useful ways.

CHE 113 41

Matheau Orfila1787-1853 – Professor of

Chemistry in the faculty of Medicine at Paris.

Traité des poisons or Toxicologie générale (1813) - published at the age of 27

His first publication was a vast mine of experimental observation on the symptoms of poisoning of all kinds, on the appearances which poisons leave in the dead body, on their physiological action, and on the means of detecting them

CHE 113 42

Arthur Conan Doyle

Creator of Sherlock Holmes - Based upon Poe’s Dupin and real life Prof. Joe Bell (U. Edinburgh).

Preceded and foretold many chemical analyses for forensic investigations

CSI Effect

The general public is now not only comfortable with forensic evidence as never before, they actually seek outopportunities to test their “forensic skills” with whodunits….

The expectation and the demand by the general public regarding the information that forensic science canprovide, often by exaggerating to impossible levels the role that forensic science plays in cases, has been risen tremendously…

CSI Effect

CSI EffectDefinition of CSI Effect (Nolo’s Plain English Law Dictionary): “A phenomenon reported by prosecutors who claim that television shows based on scientific crime solving have made actual jurors reluctant to vote to convict when, as is typically true, forensic evidence is neither necessary nor available.”In a recent CSI Effect study (N.J. Schweitzer and M.J. Saks Jurimetrics Vol. 47, p. 357, 2007) “Compared to non-CSI viewers, CSI viewers were more critical of the forensic evidence presented at the trial, finding it less believable. Regarding their verdicts, 29% of non-CSI viewers said they would convict, compared to 18% of CSI viewers.”

CHE 113 45

Earliest crime lab was founded by Edmond Locard Evolution of Crime Lab

http://www.mdpd.com/astmhtm.htmlhttp://www.mdpd.com/astmhtm.html New York State Trooper’s Forensic Lab

http://www.troopers.state.ny.ushttp://www.troopers.state.ny.us Approximately 320 public crime labs operate at

various levels of gov’t: federal, state, county, and municipal

Crime Labs

CHE 113 46

Rationale for Crime Labs

The increasing volume of physical evidence recovered from crime scenes was a result of rising crime rates.

The need to perform chemical analyses on drugs, coupled with a significant increase in illicit drug seizures.

Supreme Court decisions have enhanced the rights of the defendant. Decisions, such as those insuring a defendant’s right to counsel and the right to remain silent, have encouraged police agencies to place a greater reliance on scientific investigative techniques.

Advances in scientific technology have provided forensic scientists with many new skills and techniques to extract meaningful information from physical evidence.

CHE 113 47

Incorporating evidence collection into crime labs:

Before evidence can be properly analyzed it must be recognized, collected and properly packaged at the crime site.

Evidence technicians under the continuous direction of the crime laboratory are more likely to have received thorough training in the gathering of evidence at the crime site.

Evidence technicians, who are continuously exposed to the problems and techniques of the forensic scientist, are better prepared to adopt new procedures or modify existing procedures to improve evidence collection.

Crime Lab

CHE 113 48

Services of Crime Lab -Biology Unit-Firearms Unit-Document Examination Unit-Photography Unit-Toxicology Unit-Latent Fingerprint Unit-Polygraph Unit-Voiceprint Analysis Unit-Evidence-Collection Unit-Forensic Anthropology-Forensic Entomology-Forensic Psychiatry-Forensic Odontology-Forensic Engineering

CHE 113 49

Dynamic Duo of Principles

Locard’s Principle When two objects come into contact, some materials

or information is transferred between the two.

If this transferred evidence can be found, then the connection between the two can be established.

CHE 113 50

Dynamic Duo of Principles

Principle of Individuality Even though two objects may be indistinguishable,

they can never be exactly identical. While we might not be able to tell the difference

between two objects, at some level – maybe even only at the atomic or molecular level – they must be different.

We should be able to determine whether two samples came from one original source or from two completely separate sources.

CHE 113 51

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER PRACTICE AND MASTERY

1.1 What is forensic science? 1.2 What is the Daubert standard? 1.3 What is Locard’s Exchange principle? 1.4 What is meant by the “CSI Effect” when it comes to jury expectations during a

trial? 1.5 What is the Principle of Individuality? 1.6 What is meant by a “precedent” case? Give examples of precedent cases and

explain their significance. 1.7 How did the Frye decision of 1923 impact the admissibility of forensic

evidence? 1.8 What standard replaced the Frye standard and how did it change the use of

forensic evidence at trial? 1.9 List and explain the three parts of the Daubert standard. 1.10 Explain the importance of the Joiner (1995) and Khumo (1999) cases as they

pertain to forensic testimony.