Good Essay About Daubert Standard

The Daubert Standard refers to a standard that is used by a judge dealing with trial cases to assess preliminarily whether the scientific testimony given by an expert is premised on methodology or merely reasoning (Legal Information Institute, 2015). To determine whether the method used by an expert is valid, several factors are considered. The first factor is to determine whether the technique being employed or the theory used can be or has been subjected to testing. The second factor is whether the methodology has been done through peer review leading to its publication. The third factor requires the establishment of the potential or known error rate of methodology being used. Fourthly, the standards controlling the operation of the methodology must be in existence, and these standards must be maintained. Lastly, it is determined whether the methodology has been accepted widely within a particular scientific community (Legal Information Institute, 2015).
The Daubert Standard has a huge impact on scientific evidence. The standard sets a very high bar for the use of scientific evidence in trial cases (Welch, 2003). The requirement that the technique used in collecting scientific evidence possess the capacity to be tested ensures that only the right evidence is collected. However, the requirement that the scientific method used to collect scientific evidence be widely accepted within a particular scientific community reduces the reliability and applicability of the evidence. There is likelihood that a particular method may meet the merit standards but be rejected on the basis of other factors like the tediousness involved in conducting it, the length of time taken, and the economic expense involved in its testing.
The Daubert Standard has an application in preparing scientific evidence gotten from blood samples. A blood stain analyst collects evidence through cutting away surfaces that are stained, taking photos of the stains, and drying the stained objects before packaging them (Bevel and Gardner, 2008). This evidence is collected using cameras of high quality, cutting materials, sketching materials, and packaging used to hold the evidence. To provide initial evidence, the bloodstain analyst uses high-resolution cameras to capture the blood stains, taking videos of the scene just to indicate the perspective of the place (Bevel and Gardner, 2008). To prepare evidence for subsequent testimonies, the bloodstain analyst will determine whether the blood is for humans and proceed to profile the blood in terms of the DNA. DNA profiling is preferred in instances where victims were many. It helps to distinguish between these individuals and point towards persons of interest. Further evidence may be in the form of sections of walls, carpeting furniture and sections of flooring of the scene.
Additionally, in blood pattern analysis testimony, demonstrative aids become of immense benefit. The size, distribution, shape, surface texture and location of where the stains are found help the bloodstain analyst in interpreting the type of stain patterns present (Bevel and Gardner, 2008). Armed with the correct interpretation, they can decipher what might have caused them. Moreover, from the location of the blood stains, additional clues like any traces of emergency medical intervention and the activities of the first people who responded to the scene may be crucial in unraveling the cause of the blood stains. Therefore, demonstrative benefits are of immense benefits to explaining bloodstain pattern analysis and they should be utilized as much as possible.

References

Bevel, T., & Gardner, R. M. (2008). Bloodstain pattern analysis with an introduction to crime scene reconstruction. CRC Press.
Legal Information Institute. (2015, January 1). Daubert standard. Retrieved February 10, 2015, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/daubert_standard
Welch, C. (2003, January 1). Flexible Standards, Differential Review: D Aubert’s Legacy of Confusion. Retrieved February 10, 2015, from http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol29_No3_Welch.pdf