Class Characteristics Are Very Useful To Eliminate A 359334

Class Characteristics Are Very Useful To Eliminate A Person From Being

State and explain why evidence must be relevant to a case being investigated to be admitted into court.

Cite 2 items of evidence that would likely be considered irrelevant as evidence, and explain why they would be irrelevant. In the United States, there are forensic databases that are accessible to law enforcement and corrections to assist in identifying unknown persons. Name 3 of them. In the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) there are two specific indices. One pertains to forensics and the other to offenders. Explain the two different indexes and what they do.

Paper For Above instruction

Evidence relevance is a fundamental principle in the judicial process, serving as a criterion for admissibility in court. For evidence to be considered valid and persuasive, it must directly relate to the matter at hand; otherwise, it risks misleading the court and wasting judicial resources. The rule of relevance, codified in the Federal Rules of Evidence (Rule 402), ensures that only evidence that has the tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence should be admitted. This principle helps preserve the integrity of the fact-finding process, safeguarding against the introduction of extraneous or prejudicial information that could unjustly influence the outcome. Overall, relevance maintains the balance between the probative value of evidence and its potential to cause unfair prejudice.

However, relevance alone is not sufficient to admit evidence; the evidence must also pass the rule of materiality and meet other standards such as lack of unfair prejudice, reliability, and proper authentication. Materiality refers to the importance of the evidence in proving or disproving a fact that is at issue in the case. For example, a fingerprint belonging to a suspect would be relevant to establishing presence at a crime scene because it directly supports or questions the allegation. Without relevance, evidence—even if it is authentic or clearly obtained—must be excluded from trial to prevent it from contaminating the judicial process.

Regarding the second prompt, items of evidence that are often considered irrelevant include collateral information or evidence that has no bearing on the case’s central issues. For example, the color of a suspect’s car might be irrelevant in a case where the primary focus is on DNA evidence linking a suspect to a crime scene. Similarly, the personal habits of a witness, such as their favorite food, generally have no bearing on the case’s facts and are thus deemed irrelevant. Such items could distract or mislead jurors and are therefore inadmissible unless they somehow relate to a material issue or serve a regulatory purpose like establishing credibility.

Law enforcement agencies use various forensic databases to aid in the identification of unknown individuals and to connect evidence with suspects or crimes. Three notable databases in the United States include: (1) CODIS (Combined DNA Index System), which stores DNA profiles from crime scenes and individuals; (2) AFIS (Automated Fingerprint Identification System), which maintains fingerprint data and enables rapid comparison of prints; and (3) NIBIN (National Integrated Ballistics Information Network), which preserves ballistic fingerprint data from firearms and cartridge casings. These databases allow law enforcement to match evidence across cases and improve investigative efficiencies.

Within CODIS, there are two distinctive indices that serve different purposes: the forensic index and the offender index. The forensic index contains DNA profiles derived from crime scene evidence—such as blood, hair, or other biological material—that are entered into the system after analysis. This index allows investigators to find matches between evidence from different crime scenes or compare evidence with other known profiles. Conversely, the offender index contains DNA profiles of convicted offenders, arrestees, or individuals in correctional custody, enabling law enforcement to link biological evidence from crime scenes to individuals previously identified or convicted. These two indices facilitate both investigative leads and the identification of known suspects, respectively, enhancing criminal justice efforts through DNA technology (Saferstein, 2018).

References

• Saferstein, R. (2018). Criminalistics: An Introduction to Forensic Science. Pearson.
• Byrd, J. W., & Piekarski, J. (2014). Forensic Science: Fundamentals & Investigations. Cengage Learning.
• National DNA Index System (NDIS). (2020). Federal Bureau of Investigation. https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis
• National Integrated Ballistics Information Network (NIBIN). (2021). Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. https://www.atf.gov/certification/what-nibin
• Introduction to AFIS. (2022). International Association for Identification. https://www.theiai.org/afis
• Public Law 110-252: DNA Analysis Technical Improvements Act of 2008. (2008). U.S. Congress.
• Federal Rules of Evidence. (2020). Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules.
• National Crime Information Center (NCIC). (2021). Federal Bureau of Investigation. https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/ncic
• Risinger, D. (2013). The Rule of Relevance in Evidence Law. Harvard Law Review, 127(4), 1162-1196.
• Gaines, L. K., & Miller, R. L. (2017). Criminal Justice in Action. Cengage Learning.