Based on the textbook, the reflections and recommendations regarding Joseph Sledge case in North Carolina are justified. In Chapter 1, the text provides that, crime scenes are significant in the collection of evidence used to build up a case. In that sense, appropriate procedure should be employed in a bid to document, make observation and assess the evidence at hand. In the case of John Sledge, the crime scene was interfered with, an anomaly that ended up disrupting the evidence. The investigator failed to carry out an appropriate job, and as such, the prosecution capitalized on the hair collected at the scene to pin down Sledge. There lacked photographs, sketches, notes and reports for use as evidence to determine the verdict (Allen and Stein, 2013). For that reason, John ended up being jailed for something that could have been easily avoided by collecting and reserving evidence properly. In that sense, it is justifiable to state that, the physical evidence used in the case was not handled correctly.
The text in Chapter 2 opens by acknowledging that, physical evidence supersedes testimonial evidence. It provides a framework through which a crime theory is propagated. In view of the case, the police and the prosecution relied on the hair only to argue their case. Shockingly, the jury and the defense did not see any evidence at the trial (Allen and Stein, 2013). As opined, this was inappropriate because the law provides that, every available piece of evidence in a crime scene is useful and admissible. In this case, physical evidence was important.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Finally, it is justifiable to observe that, blood evidence in Sledge’s case was not collected in an acceptable manner (Allen and Stein, 2013). For that reason, the case was doomed to fail. At the same time, the evidence was generalized, and the shoe impressions were not utilized correctly. Chapter 3 provides that, investigating officers should secure and control the scene, and ensure information of any kind is well kept for use in court.
References
Allen, R. and A. Stein (2013). “Evidence, Probability and the Burden of Proof”, Arizona Law Review, 55: 557–602.
