f*** i dont know
Heat and magnified fibers
While criminals have used many means and tried many chemicals to destroy evidence, today, scientists can easily locate enough forensic evidence at most crime scenes. Fire (arson) and bleach have been two commonly used measures, but science can identify inflammatory agents and bleach does not remove all blood evidence. It only takes one tiny blood cell to track DNA.The BEST way to completely eliminate forensic evidence is to never commit the crime!
Crime+Investigation is a television channel broadcasting programmes related to crime, investigation and mystery programming.
The answer is in your question: contamination. To contaminate something is to adulterate it, to ruin it. In this case, it is the evidence that is ruined. Contaminating a crime scene is essentially making a difficult job performed by an often less than qualified group of people far more difficult than it should be or needs to be. It seriously reduces the potential to secure a conviction of whomever committed the crime at that scene. That, and you could be criminally charged with a variety of misdemeanor and/or felony complaints.
Well the first thing they have to do is put on a forensic suit on so non of your finger print ect cross cross contaminate the evidence, you get a sterile police evidence bad pick it up with tweezers and put it in the bag then you sigh your name on the bag when any body else handles it they have to sigh it so people know that they have handled it
f*** i dont know
The police had linked the crime to the suspect with the new evidence they had found.The police had linked the crime to the suspect with the new evidence they had found.The police had linked the crime to the suspect with the new evidence they had found.The police had linked the crime to the suspect with the new evidence they had found.The police had linked the crime to the suspect with the new evidence they had found.The police had linked the crime to the suspect with the new evidence they had found.The police had linked the crime to the suspect with the new evidence they had found.The police had linked the crime to the suspect with the new evidence they had found.The police had linked the crime to the suspect with the new evidence they had found.The police had linked the crime to the suspect with the new evidence they had found.The police had linked the crime to the suspect with the new evidence they had found.
By attempting to cross-index them with fingerprint files and identifysing a suspect, or by matching them with a specific suspect.
If you have enough evidence.
An example of indirect evidence is finding footprints near a crime scene that match the suspect's shoe size and style, but without directly linking the suspect to the crime. This evidence could suggest the suspect was present at the scene, but does not definitively prove their involvement in the crime.
Not necessarily. It would depend on how much other evidence there is. By itself, DNA on a cigarette only proves that the suspect was physically present at the scene of the crime. It proves he was there at some unknown time, but it does not prove that he was there during the commission of the crime or that he committed the crime. It is a compelling piece of evidence, but it would need to be accompanied by other evidence, in order to ensure a conviction. For example, if eyewitnesses saw the suspect's car fleeing the scene, and if bullets matching those used in the crime were found at the suspect's home, THAT, combined with the DNA on the cigarette, would probably be enough to convict.
The attorney's evidence prooved the suspect guilty of the crime.
Detectives will find evidence of the suspect committing the crime, and then put them on trial.
DNA evidence found at the crime scene can be compared to the suspect's DNA to determine if there is a match, providing a strong link between the suspect and the crime scene. Other evidence such as fingerprints, footprints, or personal belongings left at the scene can also help link a suspect to a crime. Eyewitness testimony or surveillance footage placing the suspect at the scene can further establish their connection.
a suspect in a crime is someone police think could have possibly have the motive and the opportunity to commit the crime, in other words a suspect is some who is believed to have committed the crime but there is no evidence suggesting it.
Guilt of the suspect(s)
Hair. It can be left behind by a suspect and used as evidence to link them to a crime scene through DNA analysis.