Courtroom Testimony and Ethics Flashcards

Which of the following best describes an ethical violation resulting from confirmation bias in a crime scene investigation?

Answer: A CSI only collects and documents evidence that supports the lead detective's initial theory of the crime.

Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, and recall information in a way that confirms one's pre-existing beliefs. In crime scene work, this is a serious ethical violation where an investigator might ignore or fail to collect evidence (such as exculpatory evidence) that contradicts their or a detective's theory. The other options represent different types of violations: misrepresenting credentials is perjury, accepting a gift is a conflict of interest, and failing to document chain of custody is a procedural error or negligence.

During a trial, the process where an attorney questions a crime scene investigator to establish their qualifications, training, and experience before they present their findings is known as:

Answer: Voir dire

Voir dire, French for "to speak the truth," is the preliminary examination of a witness by counsel and/or the judge. In the context of an expert witness like a CSI, voir dire is used to demonstrate their qualifications (education, training, experience) to the court, thereby establishing them as an expert in their field.

A CSI is testifying in a high-profile case. During cross-examination, the defense attorney asks about a minor clerical error in the initial crime scene log that the CSI later corrected in their final report. The error has no bearing on the evidence being discussed. What is the most ethical and effective response?

Answer: Acknowledge the minor error, explain the correction, and state that it did not affect the evidence.

Honesty and transparency are critical for maintaining credibility on the witness stand. The most ethical and effective response is to directly and calmly acknowledge the corrected error. This demonstrates professionalism and confidence in the overall report. Being evasive, argumentative, or uncooperative can appear defensive and may damage the investigator's credibility with the judge and jury.

The legal and ethical obligation for the prosecution to disclose evidence to the defense that could be favorable to the accused, including information that might impeach the credibility of a government witness like a CSI, is established by which legal precedent?

Answer: Brady v. Maryland

The Brady rule, from *Brady v. Maryland*, requires prosecutors to disclose all material, exculpatory evidence to the defense. This includes evidence that is favorable to the accused or could be used to impeach the credibility of a prosecution witness. The latter is often called *Giglio* material, which expanded upon the Brady rule. Daubert and Frye relate to the admissibility of expert testimony, while Miranda relates to custodial interrogation rights.

A crime scene investigator is on the witness stand being cross-examined. The defense attorney asks, "Is it possible that the unidentified latent prints at the scene were left by someone else after the crime was committed but before you arrived?" Which is the most appropriate response?

Answer: "Yes, that is a possibility."

The role of the CSI is to testify about facts and conditions they personally observed and documented. The investigator cannot know for certain what happened before their arrival, so stating something is "impossible" is an absolute that can be easily challenged. The most accurate and professional response is to acknowledge the possibility without speculating on its likelihood, as that would be outside the scope of their direct knowledge.

When preparing for courtroom testimony, which of the following is the MOST critical activity for a crime scene investigator?

Answer: Thoroughly reviewing all personal crime scene notes, reports, and photographs related to the case.

The foundation of credible testimony is a complete and accurate command of the facts documented during the investigation. Since trials often occur months or years after the event, a thorough review of all case documentation is essential to refresh the investigator's memory and ensure they can testify accurately and confidently about their actions and findings. Testimony should be a direct response to questions, not a speech. Meeting with the victim's family is inappropriate and can introduce bias. While understanding courtroom dynamics is helpful, it is secondary to knowing the case facts.