Forensic Case
Project Description: The purpose of this project was to experience and explore the methodology of forensics. Forensic science is the study of crime scenes and the evidence found in them. Our class was given the fictional case of Carleton Comet, who was murdered during a picnic on Valentine's Day. The task given to us was to determine which of the picnic participants was the murderer, using a series of tests and records. In addition we had to present our case in front of a jury of our peers and receive a verdict. Our work was compiled and presented in the slide show below.
Content:
Reflection: At the end of our project we were able to convict one of the suspects we charged, which was due to our successes of thoroughness and ability to follow direction but were unable to convict the second due to our lack of knowledge of the judicial system and collaboration. Firstly, we were thorough in our work. This showed when we were able to connect the dots and realize that a mysterious figure in the pedigrees named Thomas Sandstone was actually the victim, Carleton Comet. Also, we followed directions very well. In all of our experiments we listened intently and read the instructions and in doing such did not encounter any difficulties in that regard. However, we were held back due to none of us knowing very much about the US court system. This turned out detrimental to us when a charge we placed on Sam Sophomore, the second suspect, did not exist in the real life judicial system and led to him not being convicted. Lastly, we also suffered from a shortage of collaboration. During the experiments we were distracted easily and ventured off to other groups and when making our presentation it was very unclear who was responsible for certain parts and when presenting we had a short pause to figure out who was talking next. Despite a few failures we were still able to score a victory in the court.
- Forensic science: is the study of evidence at crime scenes; this was the science we were trying to replicate in our project.
- Chromatography: is the process of separating the components of a substance in order to identify its origin, we used this when determining which pen was used to write the note.
- Blood type: the classification of red blood cells into the 4 groups, A, B, AB, and O as well the Rh blood group which determines the presence or absence of antigens; this relates to our project when we used blood at the crime scene to determine the identity of the killer.
- Chromosome disorder: is a condition in which a person is affected from an error in the number of certain chromosomes; this played a role in our project by allowing us to determine possible motivation from effects from their disorders such as violent tendencies.
- DNA fingerprinting: is the process of discovering the full characteristics of a person from their fingerprints; we used this to identify the person who wielded the knife.
- Pedigree: is the recorded ancestry of a person and their family; this was used to determine motivation for the killing because of the suspect's unfortunate family past.
Reflection: At the end of our project we were able to convict one of the suspects we charged, which was due to our successes of thoroughness and ability to follow direction but were unable to convict the second due to our lack of knowledge of the judicial system and collaboration. Firstly, we were thorough in our work. This showed when we were able to connect the dots and realize that a mysterious figure in the pedigrees named Thomas Sandstone was actually the victim, Carleton Comet. Also, we followed directions very well. In all of our experiments we listened intently and read the instructions and in doing such did not encounter any difficulties in that regard. However, we were held back due to none of us knowing very much about the US court system. This turned out detrimental to us when a charge we placed on Sam Sophomore, the second suspect, did not exist in the real life judicial system and led to him not being convicted. Lastly, we also suffered from a shortage of collaboration. During the experiments we were distracted easily and ventured off to other groups and when making our presentation it was very unclear who was responsible for certain parts and when presenting we had a short pause to figure out who was talking next. Despite a few failures we were still able to score a victory in the court.