Critical Thinking and Physical Evidence

1. Do you think changing technologies are making it easier to determine who is responsible for a crime? Why or why not? -I do think that changing technologies makes it easier to determine who is responsible for a crime. Even one hundred years ago, crime solving was based on relation to the victim and possible motive, now modern technologies is helping scientists to discover more and more of the criminals without having to find a needle in a haystack. Though technology is never perfect, it does provide us with a quicker and more accurate reading of analysis. By having computer simulations, we can try to find out if our theories are plausible. And the newer technologies such as advancing microscopes and computer analyzing programs allow for a more accurate view of the evidence, and provides a better way to compare and contrast the given data in a shorter amount of time.

2. Do you think the representations in the media of the identification and analysis of physical evidence are accurate based on the information you learned in this lesson? Why or why not? -I believe that the tactics used in the media are based in truth, but are messed with to keep up the appearance of the plot. One thing that I have most defiantly learned is that things do not happen as fast as they make them seem in the media. Tests for DNA or analysis of fingerprints and hair take much more than the ten minute scene on TV. Another major difference is the fact that not all physical evidence can convict someone to the crime absolutely, in fact, it seems as if there is always some doubt to the criminal if no other evidence is provided with it. So I do find the media’s interpretation quite miseading.