Before anyone takes “forensic evidence” to the bank, they should read this opinion from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals: “Salvador committed ‘professional misconduct’ [by] using the evidence in one case to support the evidence in another case.” Ex Parte Leroy Edward Coty (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). The truth is, at the end of the day all of the science in the world is no match for the power of a lie. We constantly hear State’s attorneys complaining about the “CSI Effect,” because jurors expect the government to actually collect forensic evidence. Ex Parte Coty demonstrates the scarier reality that often once a jury hears there is “forensic evidence” connecting someone to a crime the book is closed and the verdict is in. The truth is many people in law enforcement (not all) see themselves as serving a greater good and are willing to bend (or in this case shatter) the rules. Humans are imperfect. Science is imperfect. State of the Art today may require the State of the Art tomorrow to exonerate someone after lives are destroyed. What are we to do as citizens called on to be jurors? Require more! The government has the power to search us, arrest us, walk around with guns, take our money, take our freedom, and take our lives. If we’ve given the government this immense power we should expect an awful lot in the bargain. So, how do we tell our government we expect more? When we are called on to do our duty as jurors, we hold them to their burden: Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. Is it reasonable to think that someone may “doctor” lab results? Yes, as demonstrated in Coty, it is not only reasonable, it is happening. The mission of a criminal defense lawyer is to remind jurors and the public about these dangers.
