Honestly, don't the Sanford police or RW bloviators watch any of those "Forensic Files" shows?

[spooky3]

Even with a bungled investigation the night of the crime, there should be enough evidence on the victim's and perpetrator's body and clothing to rule out false accounts of what happened that night. People who weren't there but are pontificating about what happened ought to know that there is a lot that can be done with forensic science these days.

If any of the people currently investigating what happened have any abilities whatsoever, I have some confidence that justice will be served.

[Cleita]

1. Yes, but usually on those shows, there isn't a deliberate attempt to

cover up by the people who are investigating.

[spooky3]

2. Maybe, but it is amazing what they can determine even with coverup attempts.

A tiny grass stain (or none) on clothing can be matched (or not) to the location where the stain was alleged to have occurred.

The ballistics of bullet entry/exit determine not only from which direction and gun it was shot, but often, the location of the shooter relative to the victim and other important details.

Shoe prints (if there was any mud in the area) can show who followed whom, what paths they took, whether anyone else was there, etc.

Miniscule thread from victim's clothing to perpetrator's or vice versa, can show not only that they were in close contact, but depending on where the samples were found and other info, who was on top of whom if there was a struggle.

etc.

This is all in addition to eyewitness/earwitness accounts, info from the 911 audio tape, info from the police videotape, all with time markers.

[Hoyt]

3. All defense has to do is throw up enough BS to convince 1 juror.

In Florida, at that.

[moriah]

4. Many people in the criminal justice field hate those shows.

Crime drama gives people the impression that every case can have all its loose ends wrapped up in an hour, or if it's a season finale, maybe two. The ones that are based on real events, or the shows that focus on real cases like Forensic Files, etc, are usually chosen because there was actually evidence that could be used. In the dramas, the lab has the result in a day or a few hours at the most. In the nonfiction shows, the time it took for the evidence to come back from the lab was still compressed for the viewer into that hour.

Not all crimes or criminals leave enough evidence behind -- despite the fact that DNA exoneration has freed close to 300 people who were falsely convicted of crimes, in most murders there's no DNA to test. Some criminals are just damn good at covering their tracks.

BTW: If you are a fan of true crime, I'd ask that you check out the Doe Network's website. It's always possible you might recognize a face and help bring someone's relative home, even if only after death. (Hope the Admins don't mind the shameless plug, but it's for a good cause.)

[monmouth]

5. Yeah, what's wrong with Sanford, these shows can do it in an hour...n/t

[spooky3]

6. the issue isn't time; the point is

that if the Sanford police brass thought that Zimmerman's statements about what happened couldn't be challenged by ballistics or fiber, etc. evidence, then they are not aware of how much more can be done today than in the past.

I would presume that the DOJ, FBI, or whoever else is now investigating the incident and/or the actions of the Sanford police would certainly take whatever time is necessary to do a thorough examination of the evidence that does exist.

[monmouth]

7. I should have posted the sarc. tag...n/t