Summers, Lawrence, H. (2010) Technologies Opportunities, Job Creation and Economic Growth. 28 June, 2010. National Economic Council. Retrieved from: http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/nec/speeches/technological-opportunities-job-creation-economic-growth
Pohle, George and Hittner, Jeff (2011) Attaining Sustainable Growth Through Corporate Social Responsibility (2011 ) IBM Global Business Services. Retrieved from: http://www-935.ibm.com/services/us/gbs/bus/pdf/gbe03019-usen-02.pdf
Rosen, Christine (2003) Eugenic: Sacred and Profane. The New Atlantis. Summer, Retrieved from: http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/eugenics-sacred-and-profane
Grad, Frank P. (2011) The Debate on Human Cloning and Legislative Morality: Notes on Eugenics for An Age of Affluence. Legislation and Public Policy. 2011. Retrieved from: http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__journal_of_legislation_and_public_policy/documents/documents/ecm_pro_060631.pdf
Fukuyama, Francis (2002) Gene Regime. Apr 2002. Foreign Policy NO. 129. Washington Post Newsweek Interactive LLC. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/pss/3183390
1. Jerry W. Kilgore - "DNA Samples Prove to Be Effective in Solving Crimes." Magazine Title: Corrections Today. Volume: 65. Issue: 4. July 2003. 28.
2. "DNA Money." Newspaper Title: The Washington Times. March 12, 2003. A06.
3. Richard S. Julie - "High-Tech Surveillance Tools and the Fourth Amendment: Reasonable Expectations of Privacy in the Technological Age." Journal Title: American Criminal Law Review. Volume: 37. Issue: 1. Publication Year: 2000. Page Number: 127
4. News Story: Camera detects concealed weapons in real-time. [http://news.thomasnet.com/fullstory/463051] Accessed Aug 21, 2005
5. FBI: Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System [http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/iafis.htm] Accessed Aug 21, 2005
6. Jim Keary - "Car Laptops to Help Fight Crime." The Washington Times. March 17, 1998. 6
7. "Federalizing the D.C. Police." The Washington Times. November 23, 1996. 2.
8. Impaired Driving - National Center for Injury Prevention and Control [http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/drving.htm] Accessed Aug 21, 2005
9. Candice Combs - Staff Writer. "Tenn. Police Statewide Get New Breath Testers" [http://www.policeone.com/police-products/traffic-enforcement/breathalyzers/articles/99676/] Accessed Aug 21, 2005
Cornell University Law School. (2010). Best Evidence Rule. Retrieved from http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/best_evidence_rule
Federal Evidence Review. (2010). Authenticating Wiretap Recordings. Retrieved from http://federalevidence.com/blog/2010/june/authenticating-wiretap-recordings
Manusov, V. & Larvey, J. (1999). American Jurisprudence (2nd ed.). Attribution, Communication, Behavior, and Close Relationships. Danvers: Thomson Legal Publishing Inc.
Maschke, K.J. (2013). DNA and Law Enforcement. Retrieved from http://www.thehastingscenter.org/Publications/BriefingBook/Detail.aspx?id=2168
Murphy, P. (2008). Murphy on Evidence (10th ed.).Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Naisbitt, J., Naisbitt, N. & Philips, D. (2001). High Tech, High Touch Technology and Our Accelerated Search for Meaning. Naperville: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Redeern, A., Hunter, M., Blackaby, N. & Partasides, C. (2004). Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration (4th ed.). London: Sweet and Maxwell.
Rice, P.R. (2005). Electronic Evidence: Law and Practice (4th ed.). Chicago: American Bar Association.
cited in the preceding footnotes, relates to the legal relevance of the expert witnesses who will present the forensic evidence and the corresponding incriminating conclusions. Thus, the relevancy question plays a crucial, if indirect role in forensic evidence.] [5: Federal Rule of Evidence 403- Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time]
Laying the Foundation to Specific Forensic Evidence
As discussed briefly above, different types of crime scene evidence require very different evidentiary foundations. Common objects/samples contained at a crime scene that are examined forensically include fingerprints, blood alcohol level, blood typing, DNA testing and identification of firearms. For fingerprints, the state will have to show that the fingerprints taken at the crime scene are the ones that were tested for identification (authenticity); that the prints 'lifted' by the crime scene technician were clear enough to make the positive identification (reliability) and that the prints match those of the defendant and this fact helps prove the defendant committed the crime (relevance).
For blood alcohol, blood typing and DNA analysis, the state must show the chain of custody of the sample taken from the crime scene until the time of testing and trial (authenticity); the scientific reliability of the testing done to reach the conclusions; and that the results implicate the defendant (relevance). Finally to admit a firearm into evidence, the state must show that the firearm is the precise weapon removed from the crime scene via a chain of custody and other methods, such as through serial numbers (authenticity); that science proves the weapon matches the type of weapon used in the crime (reliability); and that the weapon helps to prove the defendant's guilt (relevance).
American criminal justice is based on the notion that all people are innocent until proven guilty. Proving people guilty has become easier thanks to tremendous technological advances. The rights of the accused remain, however, and the state still bears the burden of showing that the crime scene evidence is authentic, reliable and relevant before it can be used against a defendant in a court of law.