FINAL BLOG by Ashlee Castaneda

Thesis / Main argument:

castanea1 — 2023-12-12 21:50:25 UTC

Forensic evidence is one of the major factors of determining a persons guilt and bring justice to the world, however, bias occurs often when it comes to forensic evidence and it is very common within the criminal justice system, it can ultimately lead to the jeopardization of an innocent persons life.

What is the Criminal Justice System?

castanea1 — 2023-12-12 22:00:18 UTC

The criminal justice system is what keeps our society today protected. It consists of the police, private agencies, the government, and more. This system is the one responsible for locking up criminals and keeping our community safe, however, it is far from perfect.

Justice!!!

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 11:53:21 UTC

Justice is the idea that everyone gets treated equally despite their differences. There is no discrimination when it comes to justice. Every single person is deserving of having a fair chance at their freedom.

Players Within the System

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:01:01 UTC

The criminal justice system is very complex. It has multiple layers and various laws and rules that have to be followed. The point of the system is to bring justice to the people which is why they have protocol they have to follow. Some of the players would include cops, lawyers, courts, judges, the government and more!

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:02:57 UTC

Bias?

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:09:18 UTC

Bias is a preconceived idea for or against something. It can be a person, a place, a food, groups of people, etc. Usually when thinking about bias it is thought about in a negative way. Bias does not allow a person to make a decision fairly but rather influences those decisions to make it what the person wants it to be.

Why is this important?

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:14:03 UTC

It is important to know about justice and bias because they go hand in hand when speaking of the criminal justice system. The whole point of the system is to bring justice to people without bias so decisions are fair, however, given that the decisions are made by humans bias is inevitable. Wrong application of bias can lead to injustice. People all over the world have been failed by our system. People get wrongfully convicted or victims never get their justice.

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:16:03 UTC

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:17:50 UTC

Forensic Evidence

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:22:21 UTC

Evidence is the main determiner of someones innocence. As time progresses we see an improvement in our technology leading us to believe that evidence is concrete and accurate, however, that is simply untrue. Evidence is handled by humans. Many forms of evidence is subject to bias because the people who analyze the evidence are either convinced they’re right or they come to a conclusion quickly based on what they know about the case. To top this off, there is more different kinds of forensic evidence then there were in the past and they do not have enough research done to verify if they are accurate.

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:23:30 UTC

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:25:27 UTC

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:26:22 UTC

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:27:02 UTC

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:27:59 UTC

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:30:12 UTC

Law and order effects: on cognitive dissonance and belief perseverance

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:47:40 UTC

In this study, the researchers were trying to figure out if giving different kinds of evidence in a specific order would affect the answer of the people in determining the persons guilt. What they found was that it did indeed affect their final decision. Those who were given both incriminating evidence and evidence that proved their innocence would be consistent with their answers and just use their own bias to determine the guilt, however, those who were given more incriminating evidence or had seen this evidence first would be more likely to decide that the person was in fact guilty. (Askb, K., Horselenberga, R., Maeghermana, E.B., Koppen, P.J.B,. 2022).

What does this article mean?

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:51:52 UTC

What this article is trying to say and prove is that the order in which one receives evidence can lead to developing bias. Those who saw the incriminating first or saw it in a more prevalent manner were far more likely to determine the persons guilt. It reveal that people stick to their initial ideals instead of trying to see the other perspective. It gives us an insight into the human mind and how it works and how likely it is that so many cases have been determined based off this kind of thinking.

Proof that evidence can be biased?

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:53:25 UTC

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 12:55:03 UTC

Embodied truths and authentic selves: The constitution of evidence and credibility in rape cases

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 13:08:50 UTC

"The court’s assessment of the evidence rests in particular on the details of what the aggrieved person [victim] actually remembers from the incident compared with medical documentation and expert statement regarding the bruises on her throat and the rest of her body, as well as findings of the accused’s epithelial cells on the places the bruises were deposited... Later, the court also writes in relation to witness testimonies that ‘The accused’s statement is further incompatible with other central evidence of the case.’ Although the court relied heavily on forensic evidence in this decision, it did not represent the evidence as able to speak for itself but presented the evidence as part of an overall assessment in which testimonies and credibility assessments were essential." (Laugerud. S. 2020).

What does this article mean?

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 13:13:14 UTC

The main focus in this article is determining what evidence is important in the case. In this situation there was a lack of actual forensic evidence so they had to resort to the victims/witnesses testimonies. The thing about this though is that people have a great influence when it comes to emotions. Lies can go a very long way and making a decision based off a statement alone can result in a lot of bias. The bias does not just happen against the defendant though. If the victim does not show what the jury wants to see then they may be viewed as a liar. Testimonies are incredibly biased and not a good evidence source.

Do Confessions Taint Perceptions of Handwriting Evidence? An Empirical Test of the Forensic Confirmation Bias

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 13:18:33 UTC

"When represented as evidence in a case in which the defendant had previously confessed (but then retracted his confession), participants rated the samples as more similar, and more often misjudged them to be a match, than they had earlier. In contrast, participants’ judgments of handwriting stimuli did not change after being given the same case information without the confession. In short, participants with knowledge of a prior confession saw the handwriting evidence as more inculpatory, and were more likely to judge the defendant as guilty, compared with those who were told that the defendant had maintained his innocence." (Kukucka, J. Kassin, S.M. 2013).

What does this article mean?

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 13:22:27 UTC

The point of the study conducted in this article was to determine if having knowledge of a confession would affect forensic investigators final decision. The answer in short is yes. The studies results revealed that when these people had the knowledge of a prior confession their chances of deciding that the evidence was a match was much higher. What is more surprising about the study is that they decided this when the evidence did not match at all! This just shows how easily evidence can be swayed.

Case Study of Kirstin Blaise Lobato

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 13:30:24 UTC

Kirstin Blaise Lobatos story is a very sad one that may hit home for several people. She was only 18 years of age when she was charged for the murder of Duran Bailey. Duran Bailey was a homeless man who had previously tried to sexually assault Kirstin but failed after Kirstin managed to hurt him. She took a small knife given to her by her father and cut him in his groin area. However, when she was charged the man had severe injuries including a black eye, chopped off penis and several more injuries. The evidence was all in her favor as she also had a lot of alibis yet the police and the judges did not dig further into this and set her as the prime suspect. There was a lot of bias in her case and a lack of evidence yet she still got convicted and ended up serving 16 years in prison. The criminal justice system really messed with her and jeopardized her life forcing her to stay in a place she did not belong in.

My Final Verdict

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 13:39:38 UTC

The criminal justice systems bias has got to stop. Too many people end up suffering for things they do not deserve all because of the bias that people implement into the cases. Countless studies prove how easily the human mind can be manipulated into believing something that may not be true. Countless times have people been wrongly convicted because of these kinds of mistakes. Countless times has the system failed us. Forensic evidence may not be easy to prove but it requires more research so it can accurately help our society instead of doom it. There is far too much bias when it comes to forensic evidence and it has ruined too many lives, it can not continue.

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 13:40:45 UTC

Works Cited

castanea1 — 2023-12-13 13:52:51 UTC