Forensic Evidence Admissibility For or Against in the Bloodsworth v. State Case

In this position paper, I chose Bloodsworth v.State ~ 76 Md.App. 23, 543 A.2 d 382 cases. Discuss whether forensic evidence submitted in this case should be tolerated. To understand whether evidence should be accepted, we need to first know what the incident is. The case began on July 25, 1984 and a 9 year old girl, Dawn Hamilton, died. The story is as follows. Two boys and an adult male were found at dawn in an area where trees covered near the Golden Circle Mall in eastern Baltimore, Maryland.

Kirk Bloodsworth was the first American to be released from death row prisoners for exemption from DNA evidence. Kirk Bloodsworth was a Marine officer before becoming a crewman on the east coast of Maryland. At the age of 22, he was convicted on the murder of a 9 year old girl; she suffered sexual assault, was strangled and beaten by a rock. Anonymous phone complained to the police that the witness was watching the girl and blood-brained eyes on the same day and that he was consistent with the description of the police sketch. Five witnesses insisted that they were watching the bloody incident with the victim and testified that "the terrible thing of the day will have an impact on his wife's relationship, He was useless. There is no evidence linking Bloodsworth to crime, but he has still been convicted of rape and murder, he has been sentenced to death.

The case that affects the practice of forensic psychology is Frye V. United States. During the 20th century, the acceptance of expert testimony allowed in our federal court was governed by fly standards. In the first case of Frye, the accused was convicted of murder due mainly to confessions against law enforcement agencies. The defendant insisted that the confession was wrong, hence the evidence of the accused's guilt, the result of a lie detector. However, the court prohibited that claim. Furthermore, since the test at that time was not accepted by a colleague (the scientific community) or was generally accepted, the court judged that the above testimony / scientific discovery was not approved. However, due to the new federal standard proposed by Daubert, most states have chosen to obey Daubert (Delker and Rice, 2000).

To judge the acceptability of scientific evidence, Judge Belvin Perry held a hearing in March and April. This procedure was called Frye Hearings, whose name came from the case in the state court and proved that it is impossible to accept the polygraph examination in criminal trials. Perry heard testimony to judge whether forensic evidence meets meaningful "widely accepted" standards in the relevant scientific community. According to the author 's testimony, the method used to prove the chemical degradation of Anthony' s trunk first debuted outside the laboratory in her experiment. A rare way to analyze signs of hair destruction was also submitted to the jury.