A recent story out of California shows just how important it is for lawyers to be thorough when examining evidence against a client. There, calibration equipment was found to be .001% off when audited for accuracy. While this may sound like a small error, it calls into question the overall accuracy of every result. Because so much rides on these tests, it is vital for them to be as accurate as possible. And it is vital for a lawyer to aggressively challenge any testing equipment to find problems.
Foundation of Evidence
For evidence to be admitted at trial, the lawyer must first lay a foundation for it. This foundation is laid by doing the following:
- Showing relevancy
- Establishing authenticity
- Overcoming potential objections
If a lawyer can show that forensic evidence is inaccurate, it can call into question the relevancy of the results. If there is evidence that testing equipment may have been off or that a blood sample was not handled properly, that evidence can be objected to at trial. If the state suddenly finds that it has little to no evidence to support its case, the charges may be dropped.
Scientific evidence has become very common at trial and many people assume it is infallible. But humans still need to run the equipment and interpret the results. Because humans can make mistakes, scientific evidence can be wrong. .
