Critical Lens 1: Detective Point of View
1. The case scenario presents circumstantial evidence because the evidence generated relies on inference to connect it to a conclusion. For instance, the witnesses claim that they saw people standing by the dumpster where some of the wares were found after the festival. This implies that they are not sure or it is not directive if the people that stood in the area were the offenders.
2. Documentary evidence was not used in the case because there was no written documents or other forms of media such as photographs and tape recording.
3. It is imperative to note that if documentary evidence were used, it would be secondary evidence. This is because it would be obtained from the eyewitnesses and recorded. Therefore, this would mean that collection of evidence was not done through firsthand approach, but through secondary means.
4. The evidence collection procedures that were used in this case scenario include zone, outward spiral, and point to point procedures. These strategies were used to ensure that adequate evidence was collected.
5. The written policies concerning evidence collection procedures that were implied in the scenario include ownership of liability policy and evidence protection policy.
6.The evidence is admissible in the trial because the accounts given by the witnesses (sanitization personnel) varies and this depicts that some truth his withheld.
Critical Lens 2: Judges Point of View
1. As a judge, I would consider the evidence provided by the detective to be circumstantial. My reasoning is based on the fact that the satiation worker is not able to offer substantial facts about the alleged individuals who were standing by the dumpsters. Besides, there is limited information about what he saw put into the dumpsters.
2. I can also affirm that documentary evidence was not used because there is no form of written document that was recorded or any tape recordings made from the witnesses. Besides, the detective did not approach taking photographs of the crime scene or the dumpsters.
3. Since the documentary evidence was not used, we cannot ascertain its nature to be either secondary or primary.
4. The evidence collection procedures include trace evidence, and this follows the collection of other wares that were found in the dumpsters. Other approaches include the use impressions and tool marks that could lead to the suspects.
5. As a judge, the written policies concerning evidence collection procedures that were implied by the scenario include evidence protection policy and the evidence storage policy.
The evidence is admissible in the trial because it portrays different forms of evidence. For instance, each sanitation worker's interview varied in regards to the suspects' descriptions. Therefore, it would mean that some of the information needs scrutiny.
In summary, this case scenario provides an offense with circumstantial evidence. It is imperative to note that the stolen wares that were taken during a community festival provide a crucial ground for the case. For instance, there are several stolen wares that are found in a dumpster near the area. The witnesses provide unsubstantial evidence that varies from one another when interviewed. Lack of documentary evidence by the detective forms a major drawback. It was not used because there is no form of written document that was recorded or any tape recordings made from the witnesses. However, this case could proceed to trial because there is critical evidence, though inadequate.
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the ProEssays website, please click below to request its removal:
- Influence of Civil and Criminal Laws and the Criminal Justice System
- Essay Sample on The Structural Strain Theory
- Paper Sample on HIV Infection in Prisons
- Paper Example on Security Issues in a Casino
- Types of Threats Posed to the United States - Case Study Example
- Term Paper Sample on Criminal Ethics
- Paper Example: Applicable Law to Electronic Contracts