There are no do-overs in crime scene processing. "You only get one chance to do it right," says Joseph Giacalone, a professor in the Department of Law & Police Science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. Giacalone, a former New York police sergeant who has worked on hundreds of murder, suicide and missing-person cases, says that securing a crime scene and properly collecting and storing evidence is crucial for prosecuting a court case.
While crime scenes are, by nature, porous—first responders may come in and out to help victims or secure the area—errors made at the beginning of an investigation can jeopardize prosecutions down the line. If the defense can get jurors to question a piece of evidence, and establish reasonable doubt, the accused may be one step closer to a not-guilty verdict. We looked at some high-profile cases where crime-scene glitches may or may not have tipped the scales of justice.
THE CASE: The murder case against O.J. Simpson has been called a textbook example of what not to do for forensic workers. The victims were Simpsons' ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman. They were found dead outside of Brown's condo in 1994. After Simpsons' acquittal, mistakes in the ultra-high-profile case by the LAPD Scientific Investigation Division reportedly prompted a department overhaul.
The mess-up: A sock collected from Simpson’s bedroom was found to have blood smears, after two months in the lab, calling into question when the blood got on the sock.
The result: Because of the delay in noticing the blood, defense experts were able to suggest that the blood could have gotten there when the socks were lying flat and not when being worn by O.J.