Criminal Justice | EssayIvy.com

Running head: CRIMINAL JUSTICE 1

Criminal Justice

Name

Institution

CRIMINAL JUSTICE 2

Criminal Justice

Kumho case and the scope of the Daubert ruling

The lawsuit, which Patrick Carmichael filed against the Kumho Tire Company,

compelled the supreme court of US to modify the Daubert jurisprudence. The Daubert v. Merrell

Dow Pharmaceuticals in 1993 case was instrumental in defining the Daubert jurisprudence

(Bernstein, 2014). Regarding the accident which led to death one a passenger and injury of

numerous travelers severely, Patrick Carmichael claimed that the car crash resulted from a

manufacturing defect. Dennis Carlson, Jr analyzed to prove the defect which led to the explosion

of the tire (Dillhoff, 2011). The investigation confirmed that the explosion of the tire resulted

from poor management or care. However, the analysis confirmed that the explosion of the tire

occurred from a manufacturing defect.

Based on Daubert factors, the Supreme Court concluded that the testimony of Dennis

Carlson, Jr did not provide sufficient evidence to affirm Patrick Carmichael’s claim concerning

the accident. The American court of appeal reversed the findings and concluded that Daubert

standard applies to scientific evidence (Dillhoff, 2011). Because the Daubert test covers

scientific proofs, the analysis does not include specialized or technical knowledge. Regarding the

conclusion, the court affirmed that Dennis Carlson’s testimony did not require affirmation from

Daubert test because the case relied on experimental proof rather than scientific evidence. The

Kumho verdict expanded the application of Daubert standard (Dillhoff, 2011). Even though the

Kumho verdict extended the implementation of Daubert guidelines, the decision has resulted in a

concomitant reduction in definitive roles and enhanced discretionary functions of Daubert test.

National Academies of Science Report

CRIMINAL JUSTICE 3

Researchers have conducted numerous analysis on bite marks, fingerprints, bloodstain

arrangement evidence, and tool mark to establish a reliable connection between sources and

proofs of crime cases. Even though there are multiple analyses concerning scientific evidence in

crime solving, the National Academies of Science (NAS) Report endorsed scientific position in

matters pertaining solution to the crime through scientific evidence. Based on reliability and

validity of forensic science evidence, NAS reputed infallibility claims adversarial testing and

zero mistakes or error rate claim. The study rejected dependability of possible pattern or print

individualization claims that depends on the distinctiveness of friction or abrasion ridge skin.

NAS concluded that Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) analysis acts as the most reliable scientific

method and result in an excellent degree in demonstrating the specific connection between an

exact source or individual and evidence.

Innocence Project

Formation of the Innocence Project intended to assist offenders whose innocence requires

DNA analysis for confirmation. Over the past years, American has experienced increased

exoneration irrespective of enhanced DNA technology to help in identifying specific consistency

and certainty in evidence source. Collectively, the Innocence Project and DNA analysis play a

significant role in providing reliable and accurate evidence concerning crime cases. Therefore,

the Innocence Project increases admissibility of forensic evidence or proofs relating to criminal

cases in the court of law.

Reasons Judges Admit Questionable Forms of Forensic Science Evidence

Numerous judges in the court of law rarely restrict or exclude expert testimony from

prosecutors. Additionally, the possibility of precise judicial proofs used in criminal and civil

proceedings may provide an opportunity for some judges to engage in fraud operations.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE 4

Involvement in fraudulent activities may result in judges admitting questionable forms of

forensic science evidence when handling cases. Therefore, both criminal and civil proceedings

should apply similar forensic science evidence which complies with federal regulations

governing essential and precedent proof.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE 5

References

Bernstein, D. (October 28, 2014). With Daubert and the admissibility of expert testimony, it’s

“deja vu all over again.” Washington Post. Retrieved April 22, 2018

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/10/28/with-daubert-

and-the-admissibility-of-expert-testimony-its-deja-vu-all-over-

again/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ee1fb2d6101a

Dillhoff, M. (2011). Science, Law, and Truth: Defining the Scope of the Daubert Triology. Notre

Dame L. Rev., 86, 1289.

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Paper type

Deadline

Page count

550 words

Total price: $ 15.00

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

USA, Student

"I'm fully satisfied with the essay I've just received. When I read it, I felt like it was exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the necessary words. Thank you!"

Ian McGregor

UK, Student

"I don’t know what I would do without your assistance! With your help, I met my deadline just in time and the work was very professional. I will be back in several days with another assignment!"

Shannon Williams

Canada, Student

"It was the perfect experience! I enjoyed working with my writer, he delivered my work on time and followed all the guidelines about the referencing and contents."