More and more people are becoming interested in the field of forensic science. Some are interested in entering the field as a career, others need the information for professions such as law enforcement, and the rest are simply curious about the methodologies due to the increasingly popular television shows. This blog will be used on a regular basis by students as an interactive tool throughout the semester. Let's keep it fun, interesting and respectful. -Mr. Doucette
The prosecution should have made an attempt to investigate the sheddability of the garments. They found thirty to forty fibers on the sweater and blanket, but they couldn't tell if that was a large number or not. This was the only physical evidence that they had, and they should have analyzed it more.
ReplyDeleteI think that sice there were about 30-40 fibers found from the sweater and the blanket that further investigation should have been done on the fibers. If they would have attempted to determine the sheddability of the sweater and blanket they would have known if 30-40 fibers was a large number, possibly indicating a struggle or other cause of death.
ReplyDeleteCloser examination of the fibers and maybe the locations of them could have set a better base for the case. I rhymed... If they could have connected the locations with the amounts of fibers. Maybe taken consideration of the "shedability" like in the above comments. Maybe the prosecution would have a next to solid case.
ReplyDeleteTo make the case better for the prosecution the investigators should have done their job and tested the blanket and the sweater to determine the shedability of the only two pieces of evidence. Since there was no other evidence, some would think that they should have done further investigation if they truly thought that the boyfriend was the accused. If they had tested every thought they had maybe the case against the boyfriend would have been more solid.
ReplyDeleteConsidering that there was 30-40 fibers found on the two pieces of evidence the sweater and the blanket, further study on those fibers should've been done because the amount of fibers found on those objects could of indicated a different cause of death such as a struggle.
ReplyDeleteThe prosecution could have examined how easily (or not) the fibers shed from the original garment. More evidence should have been obtained to connect her boyfriend directly to the case. She had been in his truck earlier that day and may have come in contact with the blanket, which could account for the transfer of fibers.
ReplyDeleteThe prosecution should've tested to see how easily the sweater and blanket shed fibers and how easily they pick up other fibers. Also finding more physical evidence to tie the accused to the murder would've been a good idea, like finding the murder weapon for example.
ReplyDeleteSince there were 30-40 fibers, and they consider that many fiber is a "large number", they could have made sure that the fibers were really from the sweater. The investigators should have tested to blanket as well as the sweater to see if the fibers truly transfer that easily.
ReplyDeleteThe prosecution could have investigated how easily each of the garments actually shedded. This could have proved whether the 30-40 fibers found on the garments was a large amount or a small amount. They can't conclude that the boyfriend murdered her just because his yellow blanket's fibers were found on her sweater. She was with him in his truck earlier, so the yellow fibers on her sweater proves that to be correct. This doesn't mean anything about her murder though.
ReplyDeleteTo make a better case against her boyfriend they should have tested the sheddability of the garment, and they should have double checked the truck to make sure they didn't miss anything. They also should have done more tests on the garment.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely believe that since a large number of fibers were found on the blanket, a study should have been conducted to further that "lead". However, the prosecutor seemed rather laid back, to not go after that lead. If he has no other evidence he should hang on to that single piece of evidence for dear life. That is his only way winning his case. I feel he could have done a much better job.
ReplyDeleteThe sweater and the blanket should have been tested to see how easily they are transferred. But even then, the blanket is a pretty weak piece of evidence because he already told them she had been in his truck with him that night, so obviously those fibers could have been transferred then. There must have been other sources of evidence that had more probative value than that blanket...
ReplyDeleteI think the sweater and the blanket should have gone though more testing at the crime lab. They should have known if it was a large number before they went to court. They should have tried to find other things in the boyfriend's truck if the blanket could not be a good evidence.
ReplyDeleteI believe that with the 30-40 fibers they had found on the blanket they should have been able to do more testing on the fibers to see if they could have fallen off the sweater that easily on to the blanket. Because if it wasn't that hard that would be a sign of struggle and that would give them more evidence to convict the boyfriend as guilty.
ReplyDeleteThey should have done more analysis of the blanket sweater and should have done more investigating to find more physical evidence to give it a much more solid basis for having a proper amount of evidence to prosecute the boyfriend.
ReplyDeleteI Think that they should have done more investigating then they did. With the evidence that they had it led to the boyfriend. There where 40- fibers found on from the blanket with fibers also from the sweator. I think that they should of done more testing and not have let the boyfriend of the hook that easly
ReplyDeleteI felt the prosecution did not come prepared to win that case for the victim. They came with insufficient evidence to convict the boyfriend of murder. Instead of investigating the blanket more to determine how recent the 30 to 40 fibers had been transferred they came with a weak case and there for lost the case.
ReplyDeleteTesting should have been done one the fibers to establish if the garments easily shed or if they do not.Knowing those pieces of information We could try to establish there was a sign of struggle or a small dispute or if there was nothing at all. Implying that the boyfriend knew and did more than he is telling investigators. Finding more physical evidence also would have been better
ReplyDeletethey should of had further examination of the fibers, blanket and sweater to find more physical evidence. also do further analysis son the body, and the truck and the suspect to see if there was some form of struggle that left a large amount of fibers on the blanket and sweater.
ReplyDeleteIn the Amanda Davies case, the crime laboratory never tested the yellow blanket that was found in her boyfriends truck that was transfered to her sweater. They should of tested it because they don't know how easliy or hard the blanket fibers fall off. If they would have tested it, then the evidence would have been admissible. By not testing it, the police can't accuse the boyfriend as the killer because they don't have strong evidence to link him to his girlfriends murder.
ReplyDeleteIn this case there was not much evidence. The only evidence found was fibers in her boyfriends truck, which is not enough to convict somebody. One thing the investigators could have done is to look further into the photographs and who the people in them were.
ReplyDeleteOne way to test the sheddability of the garments would have been to get a blanket and sweater with similar fibers and run an experiment. Since it would not have been proper to use the exact pieces of evidence the samples would have been a good enough basis for deciding how readily the fibers could have transfered. Even though they would have tested this however the suspect admitted that the victim had been in his truck before her death. Any fibers found in the truck or on the blanket could be accounted for during this encounter between the suspect and victim. THe prosecution may have more success in searching for alternative evidence in or on the truck, such as analyzing the soil samples from the tire treads and matching them to the scene where the body was dumped.
ReplyDeletesince there was alot of fibers found at the scene, they should have done more investigating and they should have analyzed it more
ReplyDeleteThe case was not proved very well. The fact that there were fibers of the blanket on the sweater and fibers of the sweater on the blanket it only proves that there was contact. Amanda could have very well put the blanket on while in the truck and could have been cold. The evidence only proves that she had direct contact with the blanket. Closer examination and more evidence would have been needed for the case to have been solid. The boyfriend could have very well been innocent.
ReplyDeleteI think that if they went into a further investigation with the fibers from the sweater and the fibers from the blanket, they could have made it a better case for the prosecution. Going into further investigation, they probably could have been able to determine if 30-40 fibers was a large number of fibers or not. If they figured out how many fibers would be a large number, they could have found out if 30-40 fibers was a large number.
ReplyDeleteThe crime labs could have tested the sweater and the blanket for how easily they shed fibers, and how easy the fibers adhered to each other. The number of fibers they got from the sweater and the blanket (forty yellow polyester and thirty blue-grey acrylic fibers.) were not known if the fabrics shed a larger amount as a maximum or if those were the least fibers able to shed from the fabrics. If the case only had the sweater and the blanket as physical evidence then they should have done all the test possible for the fibers. That way the crime lab would be able to have more probative physical evidence.
ReplyDeleteThings that could have been done differently to make a better case for the prosecution would have been to try to prove that the yellow fibers on Amanda's shirt were the same fibers from the blanket in her boyfriends truck. Investigators could have also tried to prove that the blue gray fibers on the blanket were the same fibers from Amanda's sweater. In the book, it says that there were no attempts made to determine the fibers were the same. Also, investigators say that the sweater may have easily shed the fibers onto the blanket, but there was no investigation on how much 'sheddibility' the sweater did have. Seeing as this was the only proof and the only evidence investigators had, they should have worked harder to try to solve the crime with their available resources.
ReplyDeleteThey could have searched for more fibers to determine whether or not it was large enough. If they would have farther examined they would have been able to determine if the victim stuggled or not.
ReplyDeleteThey should have tested the garments to see how easily fibers fall off of them. That way, the prosecutors would be able to see if 30-40 fibers was a "large number".
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe prosecution should have investigated the sheddability of the garments so they could add perspective and context to their 30-40 fiber argument. Without facts about the garments sheddability the 30-40 fibers is really a meaningless fact.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen the investigators did the search they should have looked more in to the fibers to determine if the fibers were big enough. And then they would determine if the victim struggled.
ReplyDeleteThey should have investigated more. They could have taken a look at the pick-up and the blanket and seen if there were fibers from the sweater in them.
ReplyDeleteIf the prosecutor had done the "sheddability" tests when the fibers were discovered, the boyfriend would have most likely gone to jail. The defense repeatedly argued that the fibers may or may not have been primary transfer. It could have easily been from the sweater to the seat. The prosecution tried to say that there was a large amount of fibers transferred which also indicated a primary transfer. The defense again said it is impossible to know what is a lot of fibers because the "sheddibility" was not tested.
ReplyDeleteThe prosecutors could have made an attempt to analyze the blanket to see how well the fibers of the sweater clung to those of the blanket. All they had was physical evidence. Not being able to determine if 30-40 was a large number or not the defendant was found not guilty.
ReplyDeleteThe prosecutor would have made a much stronger case if one of the original tests that they had performed was a "sheddability" test. This could have shown that if her sweater was a garment that easily shed, that transfer could have been primary. Unfortunately, they did not making their major piece of evidence weak, considering she was this guys girlfriend and it wouldn't be uncommon for her to be in his truck. If they would have taken the time to fully, and properly analyze this piece of physical evidence, they could have potentially won with a guilty verdict.
ReplyDeleteI think that the prosecution definitely needed to look into the situation more because they could of found more information then what they actually did find. The numbers of fibers found on Amanda's sweater shouldn't of been enough evidence to conclude that they were the same fibers as on the yellow blanket. There should have been more investigation to finding more fibers. If they would've analyzed it more, they would've came to a more concrete conclusion.
ReplyDeleteTo make this better for the prosecution they should have checked the "sheddability" of the sweater and the blanket. It they had checked this is would have been easier to tell if it was primary transfer. It could have helped to see if the blanket was used to transport the body or if they just came in contact in the truck. Since this was the only physical evidence this was needed.
ReplyDeleteThe prosecution should of checked how easily the garments shed, if this would of been done the prosecution would of had better knowledge and could of come back with the evidence and testing that they needed to have a better chance at winning. They do not no weather or not the amount of fibers is a large amount, causing doubt.
ReplyDeleteTo make sure if it is the right materail and take a closer look at the fragments and see if her clothing is at that blanket.
ReplyDeleteI think if they would of went into further investigation they would have searched for more fibers that could've helped decided if 30-40 fibers was large enough. And by further investigation they could've decided if the victim had struggled or not.
ReplyDeleteThe investigators should have matched the fibers. Also in a struggle some materials are going to lose more fibers than others. They should have tried to determine the rate at which the material sheds fibers to provide the prosecutors with better evidence.
ReplyDeletein the amanda davies case the prosecution had but one piece of evidence and that was some transferred fibers. the victim had 40 fibers found on her that matched the suspects blanket in their truck and the blanket had some fibers from the victim. Since their were so many fibers the prosecution said it was direct contact that happened recently. However they never tested how long those fibers would stay adhered to one another or how easily those materials shed fibers. This means that the fibers could have been transferred weeks ago and had still been there. It also means that if they don't shed fibers easily then he couldn't have done it because of the large number of fibers found.
ReplyDeleteThe prosecution should have done a shedability test on both the sweater and blanket. You would think that they would have examined every possible aspect of the evidence considering it was the only two pieces of evidence they had. I think that if they would have tested the evidence for shedability they could have made a stronger case against the boyfriend.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSince a large quantity of fibers were discovered on the blanket they should have conducted a test on how easily the garment shed. Because they did not go after this it is my opinion that the prosecution just did not care. If they were to truly pursue this lead I feel that the outcome would have been totally different. 30 to 40 fibers may or may not be a large number if I wear a wool sweater than I'm going to shed more then if I were wearing a cotton shirt. I feel the prosecution just didn't care.
ReplyDeleteThey should searched the truck and the blanket. They did not have very much good evidence because Davies could have been in the truck before with the same sweater. If they could have proven that she never wore the sweater in the truck it would make their evidence a lot stronger.
ReplyDeleteThe prosecution should have made more of an attempt to look into the sheddability of the garments. The fibers that were found were the only pieces of physical evidence. By studying the 30-40 fibers more, there could have been a different verdict given.
ReplyDeleteThe story says that 'no attempts were made to determine how readily the sweater or blanket shed fibers or how well foreign fibers adhered to these textiles'. This was a mistake, the shedding-ability should have been looked at. If the sweater didn't shed easily, it means there must have been some sort of struggle for it to all fall off.
ReplyDeleteThere wasn't much evidence for someone to get someone convicted. They did investigate and only found fibers in the truck of her boyfriends. They should have looked at the sweater and see if there were different fibers on it. The fiber was the only evidence they had so they should have looked at the photos and see who the people were and researched that a little more.
ReplyDeleteThere wasn't much evidence for someone to get someone convicted. They did investigate and only found fibers in the truck of her boyfriends. They should have looked at the sweater and see if there were different fibers on it. The fiber was the only evidence they had so they should have looked at the photos and see who the people were and researched that a little more.
ReplyDeleteThe case of Amanda Davies should have been investigated a lot further. After finding 30-40 fibers from the sweater and the blanket they should have tested and investigated more. In my opinion this wasn't a fair case for Amanda because they didn't investigate as much as they should have and came up with the verdict of 'not guilty' to quickly.
ReplyDeleteThe investigators did not do a good job because they did not know whether 30-40 fibers was a large number. That easily could have been tested with the sheddability of the two pieces. If they would have done that they would realize that it was a lot because both of the materials don't shed very easily. So having that many fibers show that there was a struggle.
ReplyDeletei think that the prosecution should have looked deeper for more physical evidence because she could have held or used that blanket while in his truck and if there were more the fibers would just make a stronger case.
ReplyDeleteThey should of figured out exactly where she was dropped off after being with that guy and tried to track fibers and ask people in the neighborhood to figure out different places she had been. After figuring out where she had been, searching for different clues and questioning people could slowly solve the case of her death.
ReplyDeleteThe prosecution should have look further into the case to observe the physical evidence. They had the physical evidence, they just didn't analyze it well enough.
ReplyDeletethere should have been a further invsetigation done on the fibers that were found since there were so many, and also found where the fibers had come from the cause of death could have been found
ReplyDeleteThe prosecution should have made more of an attempt to look into the sheddability of the garments. The fibers found were the only pieces of physical evidence. By studying the 30-40 fibers more, there could have been a different verdict given.
ReplyDeleteThey could of investigated more into the "shead ability" of each of the subjects. And more tests to figure out if the fibers were transferred at exactly that time.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn order for a better case for the prosecution to have been made the fibers and the garments should have been tested thoroughly to determine if those particular fibers shed easily or not. This would have made it easier to determine if the amount of fibers found was considered a lot and if the fibers were most likely transferred during a struggle. Especially since this was the only physical evidence they had, they should've analyzed it more to better the. Are for prosecution.
ReplyDeleteIn order for to get a better case the prosecution should have looked more into how the two garmets shed. Also they should have thoroughly tested the two fibers to make sure that they are correct.
ReplyDeleteTo make a better prosecution the examiners should have looked closer at the fibers that were found. They should have been thoroughly tested to see how the garments lose fibers and if the fibers in fact belonged to the garments.
ReplyDeleteIn the investigation of the Amanda Davies case the investigators came across tons of fibers. They examined them pretty we'll. but what they should of done differently is look at them a lot closer to determine the origin and what type of fibers they are. They also should of tested where the fibers came from and which garments they came off of.
ReplyDeleteIf they had done a closer examination of the fibers and the locations of them, they could have set a better base for their case. Then maybe the prosecution would have a more solid case.
ReplyDeleteIf they would of examined the fibers more, like where they came from. A lot of fibers were found and all of them should of been thoroughly examined.
ReplyDeleteEveryone said the same thing...
ReplyDeleteEveryone said the same thing...
ReplyDeleteAmanda's x boyfriend was a guy named Alan bayshore, not sure if I spelled that correctly or not, Amanda had snitched on him for grave robberies. Bayshore was suspected of being part of the vice lord gang who was know for cutting the throat of snitches. Amandas taste for the bad boy image led her to date a loser who killed her. I do not believe mike carrol did it. I believe bayshore did, he had an accomplice named pontius or something like that, his mustang was spotted near the crime scene by a witness,but or some reason that was not allowed in court, been to many years now to remember why, I was a reporter who dug deep into the case. I also know that a guy named doug was a confirmed member of the vice lord gang who was at the trial every day. Which further led me to believe that Amanda's x boyfriend Alan bayshore was in fact a vice lord member.
ReplyDeleteAmanda's x boyfriend was a guy named Alan bayshore, not sure if I spelled that correctly or not, Amanda had snitched on him for grave robberies. Bayshore was suspected of being part of the vice lord gang who was know for cutting the throat of snitches. Amandas taste for the bad boy image led her to date a loser who killed her. I do not believe mike carrol did it. I believe bayshore did, he had an accomplice named pontius or something like that, his mustang was spotted near the crime scene by a witness,but or some reason that was not allowed in court, been to many years now to remember why, I was a reporter who dug deep into the case. I also know that a guy named doug was a confirmed member of the vice lord gang who was at the trial every day. Which further led me to believe that Amanda's x boyfriend Alan bayshore was in fact a vice lord member.
ReplyDeletePhysical Evidence In Forensic Science
ReplyDeletePhysical Evidence In Forensic Science
Physical Evidence In Forensic Science
Physical Evidence In Forensic Science
Physical Evidence In Forensic Science
Physical Evidence In Forensic Science