SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT OF REPUDIATION OF EYE-WITNESS STATEMENTS IN FERGUSON,

The purpose of forensics investigations and the analysis of evidence is to exonerate the innocent and to provide evidence against the guilty. Physical evidence is used to support or repudiate eyewitness testimony. As this week’s articles and videos suggest, even physical evidence may be difficult for some to accept. Drawing on the readings and additional research, this discussion asks you to evaluate the value of firearms and ballistics evidence and to analyze why it is sometimes brought into question. Evaluate the circumstances that might result in some not believing the scientific evidence. Although you may be inclined toward one position, being able to debate your position involves being aware of the opposing position. In this debate-style discussion, we may have heated arguments and everyone’s commitment to netiquette and mutual respect is expected. Therefore, even if you adamantly oppose the position formulated by a peer, remember to support your opposition using the resources you consulted and ensure your opposition represents an informed opinion. Using the required readings for this week and two additional scholarly resources from the Ashford University Library or other professional resources, evaluate accepted methodologies employed in contemporary crime scene management that relate to firearms and ballistics evidence and how these influence the validity of the evidence. Analyze commonly accepted forensic techniques and contemporary specialized techniques that relate to firearms and ballistics evidence, and evaluate how the use or failure to use these techniques impacts the value of the evidence. Examine judicial expectations and requirements relative to the admittance of evidence collected by forensic crime scene investigators that relate to firearms and ballistics evidence and how the actions, inactions, and the statements of investigators impact the validity and value of evidence. Provide at least one argument in support of each side of the controversy. After considering both sides of the issue, clearly state your position and rational.