Reasonable doubt is the fundamental pillar protecting the rights of accused service members in a court martial. It is a legal standard that ensures a fair and just process and safeguards against the potential for wrongful convictions. The prosecutor must prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt, a crucial safeguard…
Two recent decisions of CAAF condone unlawful or bad practices when OSI, CID, NCIS, and CGIS search cellphones; United States v. Shields and United States v. Lattin. As a result, the MCIOs are unlikely to change their unlawful or bad practices. More than sloppy police work gets two passes because…
My argument is no, and as military defense lawyers, this is our position at a court-martial trial held under the UCMJ. In State v. Terrance Police, 2022 Conn. LEXIS 123 (May 10, 2022), the issue was whether “touch DNA” was good enough for probable cause to get an arrest warrant.…
Wednesday, March 25, 2020 Batts & Sanger on Collecting Forensic Evidence in the Emergency Department By CrimProf BlogEditor Share Jayne J. Batts and Robert M. Sanger (affiliation not provided to SSRN and Santa Barbara College of Law) have posted Collecting Forensic Evidence in the Emergency Department: A Guide for Lawyers, Investigators, and Experts (American Journal of…
Cheng & Mannion on Forensic Reports and the Confrontation Clause By CrimProf BlogEditor Share Edward K. Cheng and Cara Mannion (Vanderbilt Law School and affiliation not provided to SSRN) have posted Unravelling Williams v. Illinois (NYU Law Review Online) on SSRN. Here is the abstract: Forensics are a staple of modern criminal trials, yet what restrictions…
From friend BW. State commission calls blood-spatter testimony in murder case ‘not … scientifically supported’ By Pamela Colloff, ProPublica, July 24, 201 An influential state commission said the blood-spatter analysis used to convict a former Texas high school principal of murdering his wife in 1985 was “not accurate or scientifically supported”…