Criminal defense lawyers must pay careful attention to sexual battery cases that involve forensic evidence. Reviewing the lab technician’s analysis for error is essential. To that end, a criminal lawyer must realize that other than color, transparency, translucence, thickness, etc., some synthetic fibers are also manufactured to coil or be curly whereas others are manufactured to be straight. This may make a huge difference when comparing two suspect samples.
Like human hair, synthetic fiber comes in great variety. Criminal lawyers must be cognizant of this reality because it will effect how they deal with such evidence in sexual battery cases.
As a result of these variations, crime lab technicians will try to compare characteristics of two samples to determine if they come from the same source. When a sample fiber is believed to match four, five, or six characteristics of a control fiber, a lab technician may determine that a match has been found.
The ultimate value if this evidence to prosecutors occurs when a jury is shown side-by-side photos of the different samples, as viewed under a microscope, to illustrate that they look identical.
However, this demonstration may be misleading. Just because the two samples look the same when viewed superficially under a microscope, does not mean they have the same chemical constituency or the same cross-sectional shape.
It is important to note that fiber analysis is not limited to visual comparison by lab technicians. In some instances, fiber samples can be sent to a special lab to be evaluated using an electron microscope. In other instances, fiber samples can also be sent to a lab determine their chemical constituency. When this is done, a lab is able to determine what elements and compounds appear in the sample and in what quantities. While these types of analysis can be helpful to prosecutors, they are very costly and are rarely used.
Whenever a sexual battery case involves the use of forensic evidence, a criminal defense lawyer must consider hiring his/her own expert to review the processes used and conclusions drawn by the prosecution’s experts. In some cases, the process used by a law enforcement agency to collect, store, and test forensic evidence can be flawed.
Such flaws may come as a result of sloppy work by employees, lab technicians, or detectives. In other cases, the operating procedures employed by the crime lab itself may be flawed. When a criminal attorney represents someone accused of any crime, especially one as serious as sexual battery, he/she must get past the presumption that police do infallible work, because they don’t.
Police work is routinely flawed, routinely sloppy, and often times performed by very lazy and unmotivated investigators. When such poor quality work is performed by law enforcement, mistakes are made.