How can physical evidence lie sometimes (even though it "never…
How can physical evidence lie sometimes (even though it "never lies")?
What is evidence?
What is physical evidence?
Why is it important?
In what context is it important?
How are different disciplines connected by the broad idea of physical evidence?
Why do we use this evidence as a measure of success or failure, right or wrong, good or bad?
What is good vs. bad?
Why is that important?
How can we say it is not important?
Why does it never lie?
How can a tangible object lie?
What is a paradox?
Why do paradoxes exist?
How can a paradoxical object make or break a criminal case?
Why would a paradoxical object do that?
Who is the evidence affecting?
Are they a bad or good person?
Are they the victim or perpetrator?
How does this play into the interpretation of evidence?
Why is it important for it to express a truth?
How can the lie be helpful?
Who would it help?
What should we be assuming until the evidence tells otherwise?
Why is it better to assume the best until the worst is proven than the reverse?
How does incorrect interpretation of evidence alter this definition?
Why do some assume the evidence is no longer valid because it was processed incorrectly one time?
Why should a case be retried if evidence is processed incorrectly?
Why should we be exonerating criminals due to falsified evidence by the police or crime scene technicians?
How can we trust a test result?
What practices are in place to prevent incorrect results?
What is an SOP in a lab?
Why is this important when giving a testimony as an expert witness?
Why is it important when analyzing evidence?
Why physical evidence?
Why not testimonial evdience?
Why do we trust physical evidence more than testimonial evidence?
Why should we put more weight on physical evidence?
How can this backfire?