Bloodstain pattern analysis presents a dilemma for forensic science: it is based
Bloodstain pattern analysis presents a dilemma for forensic science: it is based on math and physics and would seem to have a solid scientific foundation but the interpretation of bloodstain patterns can be difficult and subjective. It was an area that was hammered by the 2009 NAS Report. How do you reconcile that BPA is fundamentally based in math and physics, and science overall, but is subject to interpretation and heavy subjective review? Could 360 crime scene laser scanners at crime scenes help resolve some of the issue? W hat about BPA software? What are examples of each of these possibly promising technologies? ..... Why or why not? Discuss concepts of BPA where interpretation can cause problems and why that is and what areas, if any, have been rectified with expanded research (publications) since 2009. (i.e., a lot has changed in 6 years but this publication is still heavily cited). You might start out your discussion by describing what Bloodstain Pattern Analysis is (as a hint).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *