Evidence in court

Verbal contracts are fraught with problems and should be avoided where possible. For example, to prove that a verbal contract has been entered into without the work having been carried out will need parole evidence in court. Where arbitration is entered into later, a verbal contract does not come under the Arbitration Acts 1950 and 1979. 

Forensic analysis is usually required for the collection of data in the course of determining whether legislation has been infringed. The customer requires that, above all, there is an unbroken chain of evidence from the time the samples were taken to the presentation of evidence in courts of law. In the laboratory this will include documentation and authorization for sample receipt, sample transfer, sub-sampling, laboratory notebooks, analytical procedures, calculations and observations, witness statements and sample disposal. All of these aspects can be called as evidence in court. 

TLC is also one of the analytical techniques that is commonly used to support evidence in courts of law. The chemistry concept for visualization is not unique since this reaction scheme, converting explosive to pink dyes, is decades old. TLC provide rapid screening capability for the presence of a broad range of explosive residues. TLC also provides a means for obtaining specificity, i.e., identifying numerous types of explosives, their concentrations, and also provides the capability to ratio the amounts of the explosives present. For example, Comp B has a mixture of RDX and TNT in its formulation, and if present in the sample the ratio would be 60 40, respectively. This ratio becomes visually apparent by the density of the spots with TLC technology (See Figure 2). 

Trace analysis of explosives is of major importance in forensic and environmental applications [6]. In forensics, the applications include analysis of postexplosion residues and identification of traces of explosives on suspects hands, clothing and other related items. The results of these analyses are not only necessary for the investigation of a bombing but can also serve as evidence in court. 

The defendant, Schmerher, had been injured in a traffic accident. While he was being treated in the hospital, a police officer ordered a doctor to take a blood sample to be tested for alcohol. The results showed that the defendant had been legally drunk at the time of the accident. He was arrested. The test results were introduced as evidence in court Schmerher was convicted and he appealed. 

Substantially improve the overall system for firearm and explosive residue detection from the initial arrest of the suspect to the presentation of evidence in court. 

The sequence of events associated with FDR examination is usually as follows the initial incident, apprehension of suspects, transporting of suspects to police station, sampling of suspects at police station (swabs of hands, face, head hair, and seizure of clothing), submission of items to the laboratory, sampling of clothing at the laboratory, sample preparation, analysis of samples, interpretation of results, preparation of statement of witness report, and the presentation of forensic evidence in court. 

In forensic cases it is important to ensure that all samples are labelled correctly and that there is a chain of custody (see Section 5.3) back to the point from where the sample was taken. Consider the case of two athletes who have urine samples taken for analysis for the presence of illegal drugs. One of the tests is positive and the other negative. The analyst who gives evidence in court must be certain beyond reasonable doubt that the positive result from the urine sample can be connected to the eorrect athlete. This can be achieved if the samples and supporting documentation are clearly and accurately labelled. 

Exhibit (production) label An item which is used as evidence in court, or from which materials have been removed, possibly analysed and then used as evidence. 

Materials that are the subject of criminalistic examinations constitute material evidence in court cases. Their identification is carried out by comparing them with a reference or with so-called comparative material provided for study. 

This method is particularly useful for analysis of the qualitative composition of trace amounts of various substances secured as material evidence in court cases, analysis of the homogeneity of a sample, identification of inclusions and contaminations on a surface, and detection of defects in a structure. Its main drawback is the fact that the physical nature of the microsample can affect the photometric accuracy of measurement and cause distortion of the obtained spectra. 

Are the accepted norm for evidence in courts of law for litigation cases... 

A visual evaluation is only adequate for identity tests. However, in accordance with GMP guidelines, in the absence of any further documentation a second person should also inspect the TLC plate immediately after derivatization and the result should be entered in a database. The same applies to results to be submitted as evidence in court. 

A major legal aspect is the adoption of standard methods for oil fingerprinting such as the ASTM consensus standards, because it facilitates acceptability of the findings as evidence in court cases. 

The law assumes that everyone has a free will, and is responsible for his actions. Yet, lawyers regularly present evidence that biological factors led their clients to criminal actions. More and more they use PET scans of drug addicts as evidence in court. It is a rule-of-thumb that whenever a new physical or chemical measurement of the human brain is developed, defense attorneys will try to use the findings in their clients to deny that they have free will. 

The testimony of a witness taken upon interrogatories, not in open court, under oath, in writing, and duly authenticated and intended to be used as evidence in court. Depressurization... 

The forensic identification of bulk explosives and postexplosion residues is important in bombing investigations. The information can be used to determine the type of explosive, to link the suspect to the explosive, and ultimately to provide evidence in court. Many analytical techniques have been applied to the identification of explosives and explosive residues and several texts have been written on the subject (204-207). 

Forensic toxicologists and other professionals called to give evidence in court should consider that much of their technical evidence is beyond the ready comprehension of lay people in juries, legal counsel, and judges. Restricting one s testimony to understandable language and simple concepts is highly recommended. 

The investigator is charged with the responsibiUty for determining the facts and conditions that led to the accident and making a probable cause determination The NTSB s investigations are ostensibly nonadversarial fact-finding missions with no formal issues in contest In practice, however, these investigations can become quite contentious. Ultimately, however, neither the board s factual analysis nor its probable cause determination with respect to an accident are admissible as evidence in court. 

On the problem of expert evidence in court in general, see B. Wynne and R. Smith eds.. Expert Evidence Interpreting Science and the Law (London, 1988). 

---