earticle

영어

The basics of scientific verification is the reproducibility that is possible to verify the same phenomena by the third party using the given method. It is difficult to give the decisive meaning to determine guilty or not guilty when the effort to make the significant meaning from the small basis with the shortage of available evidences does not reach the basic requirements of scientific verification. In this paper, we considered the deficient part of scientific verification process that could not play crucial role in spite of many efforts and the positive considerations of justice department. We considered the admissibility of evidence and probative power of bloodstain pattern analysis in the homicide case of an old woman who died from the head injuries. The bloodstain of 4㎜ in diameter found in the inner side of a suspect’s left running shoe was inferred to an impact spatter and inferred that the bloodstain was created when a blood source in the victim’s head was broken up at a source by the suspect’s strike according to the bill of indictment and the report of bloodstain pattern analysis submitted to the court. The justice department, however, ruled the defendant not guilty because of the reason that it is difficult that the report of bloodstain pattern analysis proves the suspect guilty to the extent that ‘the judiciary exclude the reasonable doubt’. There are specific morphological proof, objective proof about the deposition time of bloodstains and the environment of deposition of the impact spatter in the condition of the analysis to the extent that the reasonable doubt was excluded in the bloodstain pattern analysis. But it seemed to have many difficulties in deciding as one. One of the objectivity guarantee or the basic notion of science is the problem that the third party can prove or approve specific facts by the same method or the same point of view. The morphological analysis such as bloodstain pattern analysis requires the proof of appropriateness about all variables generalizing the analysis that fits the objective facts, not the expert’s assertion. We wish the use of evidences of bloodstain pattern analysis takes a step forward with the considerations of this paper in the court that deals with similar cases.