New And Improved Ways To Fight Crime

In the past, fighting crime and catching criminals was a very difficult thing to do and therefore many criminals walked free on the streets while many innocent people were punished and sometimes even sentenced to death. One of the main reasons that many people are against the death penalty is that they believe that an innocent man could be put to death due to a lack of evidence. However, today scientists, engineers, software specialists and the police together have found new and improved ways of proving a criminal guilty.
Gathering evidence
DNA evidence and forensics are some of the best known ways of identifying a criminal today however older ways such as usage of a jury are still very much used. There are new ways of gathering evidence such as mobile forensics, a science which analyses a mobile device in minor detail under forensic conditions to identify the criminals or the victims’ last movements and activities.
The connection between a mobile phones activity and the solution to a criminal case has long since been known as it can point the detective in the right direction judging from the person they spoke to last and the GPS tracker on their mobile phone which can point a detective in the last movements of the victim. This is where mobile forensics comes in to the picture as it is able to give a detailed description of where the victim or the criminal went to in the last few days before the crime occurred and who the last people they spoke to were. It is almost certain that one or two of the last people they spoke to will be involved in some way in the crime or will at least be able to give evidence to shed some light on the incidents that have occurred.
Problems with the jury system
While there are certain benefits to the jury system, there are more negatives. In fact it has been suggested that the world gets rid of the jury system all together due to the many flaws in the system. One of the main disadvantages of the jury system is that it is solely based on the opinions and emotions of humans, which can easily be wrong. While admittedly, it is based on the opinions and emotions of a large group of humans, it is perfectly possible that their emotions and opinions could be wrong and therefore an innocent man could be punished or a criminal could walk free. Another problem is that the jury can be corrupted even in the case of them not being allowed to meet with anyone of the opposition.