Legal Studies (PLEASE HELP) (1 Viewer)

T_Brendan_T

New Member
Joined
May 14, 2021
Messages
3
Gender
Male
HSC
2022
Im currently working on my assignment about DNA evidence. Does anyone know when DNA evidence came to Australia and who implemented it. Also who opposed DNA evidence
 

jimmysmith560

Le Phénix Trilingue
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Messages
767
Location
Krak des Chevaliers
Gender
Male
HSC
2019
Uni Grad
2022
Here's some information:

DNA evidence has had a significant impact on the Australian criminal justice system since it was first used at a criminal trial in the Australian Capital Territory in 1989.

I'm not entirely sure about who opposed DNA evidence though sorry.
 

T_Brendan_T

New Member
Joined
May 14, 2021
Messages
3
Gender
Male
HSC
2022
Here's some information:

DNA evidence has had a significant impact on the Australian criminal justice system since it was first used at a criminal trial in the Australian Capital Territory in 1989.

I'm not entirely sure about who opposed DNA evidence though sorry.
Thank you
 

jimmysmith560

Le Phénix Trilingue
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Messages
767
Location
Krak des Chevaliers
Gender
Male
HSC
2019
Uni Grad
2022
I'm not entirely sure, but I would assume that the opposition consists mainly of scientists and lawyers (and any other parties/bodies to whom DNA evidence is relevant).

- Some scientists might argue things relating to the inaccuracy/unreliability of DNA testing and/or that DNA evidence/testing could be detrimental to a person's health if a person suffers from a particular health problem that doesn't allow them to be tested for example.
- Lawyers and other legal figures may use the scientists' argument of DNA evidence potentially being inaccurate/unreliable to argue that DNA evidence cannot be considered decisive, or in some cases even indicative of a particular case/accusation, making it ineffective, meaning it cannot be considered/treated as evidence.

That's what I think. I hope this helps! 😄
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top