Scribd
Upload
17 views3 pages

Module 13: Evidence Admissibility Guide

Uploaded by

mabbagueduard2002
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
17 views3 pages

Module 13: Evidence Admissibility Guide

Uploaded by

mabbagueduard2002
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

CDI 3 – Specialized Crime Investigation 2 with Simulation on Interrogation and Interview

MODULE 13: Admissibility of Evidence Page 1 of 3

REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMISSIBILITY

● Requirements for Admissibility


The U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of Daubert vs. Menell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993) came up
with a test of reliability and directed that trial judges are to consider tour factors when determining
the admissibility of scientific evidence, to wit:
A. whether the theory or technique can be tested
B. whether the proffered work has been subjected to peer review
C. whether the rate of error is acceptable
D. whether the method at issue enjoys widespread acceptance.

This Daubert Test was adopted by the Philippine Supreme Court when it finally accepted the result
of DNA testing as admissible evidence.

Scientific Tests Judicially Accepted:


▪ Paraffin Tests
▪ Firearms Identification Evidence or Ballistic Test - to determine whether a bullet was fired from a
particular gun.
▪ Questioned Document Test and Handwriting Analysis
▪ Drug Tests on a Person
▪ Toxicology or Test of Poison
▪ Psychiatric Examination
▪ Voice Identification Test
▪ Finger Printing
▪ Identification through Dentures
▪ Genetic Science such as DNA or Blood Test

Note: Lie Detection Test: The result is not admissible as evidence in the Philippines

Chain of Custody
⮚ The Chain of custody of an item of evidence shows its entire history starting with its initial
discovery, collection, packaging, transportation, examination, storage, and presentation in court.
Generally, in order for evidence to be admissible in court of law, strictly accountability must be
established to show where, when, and how an item of evidence was collected.
CDI 3 – Specialized Crime Investigation 2 with Simulation on Interrogation and Interview
MODULE 13: Admissibility of Evidence Page 2 of 3

Basic Principles of Evidence


[Link]
It is what makes one thing different from all others similar to it. An individual has thousands of
characteristics that are common to other people. However, every human being has many physical
characteristics, such as fingerprints, ear prints, prints, handwriting, and DNA that make him/her
unique.
[Link] Characteristics
Evidence that can only be identified by placing it into a particular class, regardless of the amount
or thoroughness of examination, is known as evidence with only class characteristics. A definite
identification as to its source can never be made, since there is a possibility of more than one source for
this evidence.
3. Probability
The probability that a combination of independent events will occur is the product of individual
probabilities. Thus, the probability of association with a particular situation may be very high when
a number of separate factors are found to correspond.
[Link]
Recognizing the rarity of time, place, and circumstances associated with physical evidence found
in or near the crime scene is a developed skill.
[Link] of Transfer
When two objects come into contact, there will frequently be a transfer of small amounts of
material from one to the other. Thus, when suspect/s come in contact with the victim and objects at
the crime scene, they frequently leave behind traces of themselves and take with them traces of
any objects touched. This also applies to police officers and crime scene specialists. Materials
CDI 3 – Specialized Crime Investigation 2 with Simulation on Interrogation and Interview
MODULE 13: Admissibility of Evidence Page 3 of 3

transferred in this way are normally referred to as trace evidence.

Comparisons
The most definite point of comparison between objects is an obvious physical match. By matching
the two pieces the crime scene specialist is able to prove a connection between not only the items,
but frequently the suspect and the crime scene, or the suspect and the victim of the crime.

Main Sources of Physical Evidence


[Link] Crime Scene
The crime scene is usually the focus of the preliminary investigation and also the primary source of
physical evidence. However, it is also an area with the greatest potential for the destruction or
contamination of evidence.
[Link] Victim
The victim of a crime is often a potential source of physical evidence, particularly in the case of sex
crimes Hair, fibers and biological fluids are all potential evidence and need to be collected following
establish protocol.
[Link] Suspect and His/Her Environment
The suspect and his/her environment can be prime sources of physical evidence just as the victim of
a sexual assault will most likely possess physical evidence, the suspect is no different.

Common questions

Powered by AI

Physical matching involves identifying corresponding features or pieces between objects to demonstrate their previous unity or association. This method helps establish a direct link between the suspect and the crime scene or victim, thereby serving as persuasive evidence of involvement or presence .

Accepted scientific methods include DNA testing, ballistic tests, handwriting analysis, and drug tests, which are admissible as they meet the reliability and acceptance criteria detailed in the Daubert Test. Conversely, lie detection tests are excluded because they are not considered scientifically reliable or accepted by judicial standards .

The crime scene, the victim, and the suspect and their environment are the primary sources of physical evidence. At the crime scene, there's a high risk of evidence contamination; the victim's evidence must be carefully managed to avoid destruction or loss, especially in sensitive cases like sex crimes; and the suspect's environment poses a risk of evidence being tampered with or inadvertently lost .

Individuality refers to the unique characteristics of a person, such as fingerprints and DNA, that distinguish them from others. In forensic science, this concept allows for definitive identification and helps establish a person's connection to evidence, contrasting class characteristics which group items without specific individual identification .

The chain of custody is crucial for maintaining the integrity of evidence, showing its history from discovery through presentation in court. For evidence to be admissible, strict accountability regarding where, when, and how it was collected must be established, ensuring that it has not been tampered with or contaminated .

Peer review functions as a vetting mechanism under the Daubert Test, which gauges whether a scientific method has been critically evaluated by experts in the field. This scrutiny endorses the reliability and credibility of the method, thus influencing its admissibility in legal proceedings .

The theory of transfer posits that whenever two objects come into contact, materials are exchanged between them. At a crime scene, this means suspects may leave traces of themselves on the victim or objects and take traces with them. This transferred material, referred to as trace evidence, can potentially connect suspects to the crime scene .

The probability principle is crucial as it calculates the likelihood of various independent pieces of evidence being associated with the same source or event. In criminal cases, multiple factors with high corresponding probabilities strengthen the association and thereby the validity of the evidence, contributing to a more robust conclusion .

Rarity refers to the uncommon nature of certain evidence due to unique circumstances, time, and place. In crime scene investigations, identifying rare elements can significantly increase the probability of a unique association between the evidence and the crime, thereby strengthening its relevance .

The Daubert Test, established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert vs. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993), requires judges to evaluate the reliability of scientific evidence by considering whether: A) the theory or technique can be tested, B) the proffered work has been subjected to peer review, C) the rate of error is acceptable, and D) the method at issue enjoys widespread acceptance .

You might also like