The Experts below are selected from a list of 30060 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ira Sommers - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Influence of Forensic Evidence on the Case Outcomes of Rape Incidents
Justice System Journal, 2013Co-Authors: Ira Sommers, Deborah R. BaskinAbstract:The study focuses on the influence of Forensic Evidence on the processing of rape incidents. It utilizes a prospective analysis of official record data that followed cases from the time of police report to final criminal disposition. The results indicate that Forensic Evidence is auxiliary, occasional, and non-determinative in the majority of rape cases. Victim willingness to testify and injuries to the victim are the strongest predictors of case outcomes. Additionally, the study finds that the relationship between the victim and suspect does not affect the likelihood of charging or conviction.
-
Crime-Show-Viewing Habits and Public Attitudes Toward Forensic Evidence: The “CSI Effect” Revisited
Justice System Journal, 2013Co-Authors: Deborah R. Baskin, Ira SommersAbstract:The present study assesses whether watching crime shows affects attitudes toward Forensic Evidence and whether these attitudes result in a predisposition toward conviction or acquittal in a criminal trial. Data came from a telephone survey of a random sample of 1,201 California registered voters. The results indicate that, independent of criminal justice experiences, sociodemographics, and other background characteristics, crime-show-viewing habits affect potential jurors' pretrial attitudes and predispositions regarding scientific Evidence and various forms of testimony. However, pretrial attitudes do not affect respondents' beliefs about their willingness to convict/acquit based on the presence/absence of Forensic Evidence. Instead, crime show viewing has a direct effect on this belief.
-
The Influence of Forensic Evidence on the Case Outcomes of Assault and Robbery Incidents
Criminal Justice Policy Review, 2011Co-Authors: Deborah R. Baskin, Ira SommersAbstract:The study focused on the influence of Forensic Evidence on the case processing of assault and robbery incidents. The study utilized a prospective analysis of official record data that followed cases in five jurisdictions from the time of police incident report to final criminal disposition. The results indicated that Forensic Evidence was collected in less than a third of all robbery and assault cases. Forensic Evidence did not impact case outcomes for either robbery or assault cases. Cases in which there is physical Evidence are no more likely to reach conviction than those without such Evidence. However, the availability of victim and/or witness accounts were found to predict movement through various stages of the criminal case process. Thus, locating and encouraging victims and witnesses to provide testimony appears to enhance case solvability. In addition, variables associated with the perceived seriousness of the offense impact case progression.
-
Solving Residential Burglaries in the United States: The Impact of Forensic Evidence on Case Outcomes:
International Journal of Police Science & Management, 2011Co-Authors: Deborah Baskin, Ira SommersAbstract:Despite recent developments and the growth of Forensic science services in the United States, little published research exists on the impact of Forensic Evidence on criminal case outcomes. The present study focused on the influence of Forensic Evidence on the case processing of residential burglary incidents in the United States. The study utilised a prospective analysis of official record data that followed cases in five jurisdictions from the time of police incident report to final criminal disposition. The study results showed that most residential burglaries went unsolved. Only 8.2 per cent of the 1,263 burglary incidents resulted in arrest and only 3.2 per cent of all incidents had a conviction. Cases were more likely to have arrests and referrals to the district attorney when witnesses and victims provided information to the police and Forensic Evidence was collected at crime scenes. The only significant predictor of case charges was witness reports. Forensic Evidence variables did not influence cas...
-
The influence of Forensic Evidence on the case outcomes of homicide incidents
Journal of Criminal Justice, 2010Co-Authors: Deborah R. Baskin, Ira SommersAbstract:Objective In spite of the growth of Forensic science services little published research exists related to the impact of Forensic Evidence on criminal case outcomes. The present study focused on the influence of Forensic Evidence on the case processing of homicide incidents.Materials and Methods The study utilized a prospective analysis of official record data that followed homicide cases in five jurisdictions from the time of police incident report to final criminal disposition.Results The results showed that most homicides went unsolved (34.5% conviction rate). Only 55.5% of the 400 homicide incidents resulted in arrest of which 77% were referred to the district attorney. On the other hand, 94% of cases referred to the district attorney were charged. Cases were more likely to have arrests, referrals, and charges when witnesses provided information to the police. Suspects who knew their victims were more likely to be arrested and referred to the district attorney. Homicides committed with firearms were less likely to be cleared. The most noteworthy finding was that none of the Forensic Evidence variables significantly influenced criminal justice outcomes.Conclusions The study results suggest that Forensic Evidence is auxiliary and non-determinative for homicide cases.
C W Christian - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Forensic Evidence Findings in Prepubertal Victims of Sexual Assault
Pediatrics, 2000Co-Authors: C W Christian, A R De Jong, J Loiselle, Jane Lavelle, Lisa Anne Brenner, Marshall M. JoffeAbstract:Objective. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends Forensic Evidence collection when sexual abuse has occurred within 72 hours, or when there is bleeding or acute injury. It is not known whether these recommendations are appropriate for prepubertal children, because few data exist regarding the utility of Forensic Evidence collection in cases of child sexual assault. This study describes the epidemiology of Forensic Evidence findings in prepubertal victims of sexual assault. Methods. The medical records of 273 children Results. Some form of Forensic Evidence was identified in 24.9% of children, all of whom were examined within 44 hours of their assault. Over 90% of children with positive Forensic Evidence findings were seen within 24 hours of their assault. The majority of Forensic Evidence (64%) was found on clothing and linens, yet only 35% of children had clothing collected for analysis. After 24 hours, all Evidence, with the exception of 1 pubic hair, was recovered from clothing or linens. No swabs taken from the child9s body were positive for blood after 13 hours or sperm/semen after 9 hours. A minority of children (23%) had genital injuries. Genital injury and a history of ejaculation provided by the child were associated with an increased likelihood of identifying Forensic Evidence, but several children had Forensic Evidence found that was unanticipated by the child9s history. Conclusions. The general guidelines for Forensic Evidence collection in cases of acute sexual assault are not well-suited for prepubertal victims. The decision to collect Evidence is best made by the timing of the examination. Swabbing the child9s body for Evidence is unnecessary after 24 hours. Clothing and linens yield the majority of Evidence and should be pursued vigorously for analysis.
-
Forensic Evidence findings in prepubertal victims of sexual assault.
Pediatrics, 2000Co-Authors: C W Christian, J M Lavelle, A R De Jong, J Loiselle, L Brenner, M JoffeAbstract:The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends Forensic Evidence collection when sexual abuse has occurred within 72 hours, or when there is bleeding or acute injury. It is not known whether these recommendations are appropriate for prepubertal children, because few data exist regarding the utility of Forensic Evidence collection in cases of child sexual assault. This study describes the epidemiology of Forensic Evidence findings in prepubertal victims of sexual assault. The medical records of 273 children <10 years old who were evaluated in hospital emergency departments in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and had Forensic Evidence processed by the Philadelphia Police Criminalistics Laboratory were retrospectively reviewed for history, physical examination findings, Forensic Evidence collection, and Forensic results. Some form of Forensic Evidence was identified in 24.9% of children, all of whom were examined within 44 hours of their assault. Over 90% of children with positive Forensic Evidence findings were seen within 24 hours of their assault. The majority of Forensic Evidence (64%) was found on clothing and linens, yet only 35% of children had clothing collected for analysis. After 24 hours, all Evidence, with the exception of 1 pubic hair, was recovered from clothing or linens. No swabs taken from the child's body were positive for blood after 13 hours or sperm/semen after 9 hours. A minority of children (23%) had genital injuries. Genital injury and a history of ejaculation provided by the child were associated with an increased likelihood of identifying Forensic Evidence, but several children had Forensic Evidence found that was unanticipated by the child's history. The general guidelines for Forensic Evidence collection in cases of acute sexual assault are not well-suited for prepubertal victims. The decision to collect Evidence is best made by the timing of the examination. Swabbing the child's body for Evidence is unnecessary after 24 hours. Clothing and linens yield the majority of Evidence and should be pursued vigorously for analysis.
Corinna Kruse - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Social Life of Forensic Evidence
2015Co-Authors: Corinna KruseAbstract:In The Social Life of Forensic Evidence, Corinna Kruse provides a major contribution to understanding Forensic Evidence and its role in the criminal justice system. Arguing that Forensic Evidence can be understood as a form of knowledge, she reveals that each piece of Evidence has a social life and biography. Kruse shows how the crime scene examination is as crucial to the creation of Forensic Evidence as laboratory analyses, the plaintiff, witness, and suspect statements elicited by police investigators, and the interpretations that prosecutors and defense lawyers bring to the Evidence. Drawing on ethnographic data from Sweden and on theory from both anthropology and science and technology studies, she examines how Forensic Evidence is produced and how it creates social relationships as cases move from crime scene to courtroom. She demonstrates that Forensic Evidence is neither a fixed entity nor solely material, but is inseparably part of and made through particular legal, social, and technological practices.
-
The Bayesian approach to Forensic Evidence: Evaluating, communicating, and distributing responsibility
Social Studies of Science, 2013Co-Authors: Corinna KruseAbstract:This article draws attention to communication across professions as an important aspect of Forensic Evidence. Based on ethnographic fieldwork in the Swedish legal system, it shows how Forensic scientists use a particular quantitative approach to evaluating Forensic laboratory results, the Bayesian approach, as a means of quantifying uncertainty and communicating it accurately to judges, prosecutors, and defense lawyers, as well as a means of distributing responsibility between the laboratory and the court. This article argues that using the Bayesian approach also brings about a particular type of intersubjectivity; in order to make different types of Forensic Evidence commensurable and combinable, quantifications must be consistent across Forensic specializations, which brings about a transparency based on shared understandings and practices. Forensic scientists strive to keep the black box of Forensic Evidence – at least partly – open in order to achieve this transparency.
-
legal storytelling in pre trial investigations arguing for a wider perspective on Forensic Evidence
New Genetics and Society, 2012Co-Authors: Corinna KruseAbstract:Forensic Evidence, and most prominently DNA Evidence, is often understood as particularly reliable and “objective.” However, just as other Evidence, Forensic Evidence must be interpreted and thus made meaningful in order to “say” something about a defendant's culpability. This paper discusses how meaning is created from and around Forensic Evidence: in criminal trials, Evidence is placed in legally meaningful narratives that draw upon well-known cultural scripts and categories and that associate (or disassociate) a defendant with legal categories and consequences. The paper will demonstrate that these stories are not only told in court as a means of arguing a case, but are also continuously told and re-shaped during pre-trial investigations, as Evidence in a case is assembled and assessed. Consequently, I argue that, in order to understand Forensic Evidence, it is just as important to pay attention to pre-trial investigations as it is to study Forensic laboratories and courtroom interactions.
-
Forensic Evidence: Materializing bodies, materializing crimes
European Journal of Women's Studies, 2010Co-Authors: Corinna KruseAbstract:Based on an ethnographic study of fingerprint and DNA Evidence practices in the Swedish judicial system, this article analyses the materialization of Forensic Evidence. It argues that Forensic Evidence, while popularly understood as firmly rooted in materiality, is inseparably technoscientific and cultural. Its roots in the material world are entangled threads of matter, technoscience and culture that produce particular bodily constellations within and together with a particular sociocultural context. Forensic Evidence, it argues further, is co-materialized with crimes as well as with particular bodily and social constellations. Consequently, the article suggests that an analysis of how Forensic Evidence is produced can contribute to feminist understandings of the inseparability of sex and gender: understanding bodies as ongoing technoscientific-material-cultural practices of materialization may be a fruitful approach to analysing their complexity, and the relationships in which they are placed, without surrendering to either cultural or biological determinism. Taking a theoretical point of departure not only in an STS-informed approach, but also in material feminist theorizations, the article also underlines that the suggested theoretical conversations across borders of feminist theory and STS should be understood as a two-way-communication where the two fields contribute mutually to each other.
Marshall M. Joffe - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Forensic Evidence Findings in Prepubertal Victims of Sexual Assault
Pediatrics, 2000Co-Authors: C W Christian, A R De Jong, J Loiselle, Jane Lavelle, Lisa Anne Brenner, Marshall M. JoffeAbstract:Objective. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends Forensic Evidence collection when sexual abuse has occurred within 72 hours, or when there is bleeding or acute injury. It is not known whether these recommendations are appropriate for prepubertal children, because few data exist regarding the utility of Forensic Evidence collection in cases of child sexual assault. This study describes the epidemiology of Forensic Evidence findings in prepubertal victims of sexual assault. Methods. The medical records of 273 children Results. Some form of Forensic Evidence was identified in 24.9% of children, all of whom were examined within 44 hours of their assault. Over 90% of children with positive Forensic Evidence findings were seen within 24 hours of their assault. The majority of Forensic Evidence (64%) was found on clothing and linens, yet only 35% of children had clothing collected for analysis. After 24 hours, all Evidence, with the exception of 1 pubic hair, was recovered from clothing or linens. No swabs taken from the child9s body were positive for blood after 13 hours or sperm/semen after 9 hours. A minority of children (23%) had genital injuries. Genital injury and a history of ejaculation provided by the child were associated with an increased likelihood of identifying Forensic Evidence, but several children had Forensic Evidence found that was unanticipated by the child9s history. Conclusions. The general guidelines for Forensic Evidence collection in cases of acute sexual assault are not well-suited for prepubertal victims. The decision to collect Evidence is best made by the timing of the examination. Swabbing the child9s body for Evidence is unnecessary after 24 hours. Clothing and linens yield the majority of Evidence and should be pursued vigorously for analysis.
M Joffe - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Forensic Evidence findings in prepubertal victims of sexual assault.
Pediatrics, 2000Co-Authors: C W Christian, J M Lavelle, A R De Jong, J Loiselle, L Brenner, M JoffeAbstract:The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends Forensic Evidence collection when sexual abuse has occurred within 72 hours, or when there is bleeding or acute injury. It is not known whether these recommendations are appropriate for prepubertal children, because few data exist regarding the utility of Forensic Evidence collection in cases of child sexual assault. This study describes the epidemiology of Forensic Evidence findings in prepubertal victims of sexual assault. The medical records of 273 children <10 years old who were evaluated in hospital emergency departments in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and had Forensic Evidence processed by the Philadelphia Police Criminalistics Laboratory were retrospectively reviewed for history, physical examination findings, Forensic Evidence collection, and Forensic results. Some form of Forensic Evidence was identified in 24.9% of children, all of whom were examined within 44 hours of their assault. Over 90% of children with positive Forensic Evidence findings were seen within 24 hours of their assault. The majority of Forensic Evidence (64%) was found on clothing and linens, yet only 35% of children had clothing collected for analysis. After 24 hours, all Evidence, with the exception of 1 pubic hair, was recovered from clothing or linens. No swabs taken from the child's body were positive for blood after 13 hours or sperm/semen after 9 hours. A minority of children (23%) had genital injuries. Genital injury and a history of ejaculation provided by the child were associated with an increased likelihood of identifying Forensic Evidence, but several children had Forensic Evidence found that was unanticipated by the child's history. The general guidelines for Forensic Evidence collection in cases of acute sexual assault are not well-suited for prepubertal victims. The decision to collect Evidence is best made by the timing of the examination. Swabbing the child's body for Evidence is unnecessary after 24 hours. Clothing and linens yield the majority of Evidence and should be pursued vigorously for analysis.
