 |
|
|
 |
New Member
|
|
Jul 10, 2008, 04:18 PM
|
|
Ballistic experts
How reliable is a claim that a bullet is from a person's gun if the claim is made by a ballistic's expert?
|
|
 |
Full Member
|
|
Jul 10, 2008, 04:23 PM
|
|
Well granted my knowledge is from CSI:Miami, but I'm pretty sure they have to be pretty sure to testify to that. And that's kind of their job. Is this a situation where you know it wasn't the gun, but someone testified that it was? A little more info could help here.
|
|
 |
Uber Member
|
|
Jul 11, 2008, 06:47 AM
|
|
 Originally Posted by sassysambol
How reliable is a claim that a bullet is from a person's gun if the claim is made by a ballistic's expert?
Where I am if there is actually a qualified expert and all the testing was done and testified to - 100%.
|
|
 |
Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
|
|
Jul 11, 2008, 06:51 AM
|
|
The rifling inside a gun barrel is as unique as a fingerprint. This is what makes it possible to identify whether a bullet was fired from a specific gun. This is a science, not guesswork. However, depending on the damage to the bullet, an expert may have to make a guess on a partial ballistics match. This is generally solid forensics evidence.
|
|
 |
Uber Member
|
|
Jul 11, 2008, 07:23 AM
|
|
 Originally Posted by sassysambol
How reliable is a claim that a bullet is from a person's gun if the claim is made by a ballistic's expert?
Hello sassy:
If the "expert" remains an expert after he's taken apart by a good defense attorney, his testimony will be believed by BOTH a judge and a jury.
excon
|
|
 |
Ultra Member
|
|
Jul 11, 2008, 07:37 AM
|
|
Ballistics identification is a science, preformed under very strict conditions.
If the testimony is from a legitimate expert, the accuracy is all but fool proof.
Rifling is like fingerprints, there are no two guns with the exact pattern, so the expert testimony is VERY reliable.
|
|
 |
Ultra Member
|
|
Jul 11, 2008, 08:35 AM
|
|
I have read about two occasions over many years, where the experts (both State Police but different states) admitted to falsifying results. They did it to beef up up their reputaion for convictions. But except in these rare cases, the evidence is tough to dispute.
|
|
Question Tools |
Search this Question |
|
|
Add your answer here.
Check out some similar questions!
What do the experts think?
[ 1 Answers ]
I recently inherited some commercial property with no mortgage. I want to start my own business but my savings are very limited. My question is... can I take out, or would I even qualify for a mortgage on the property that I now own, to start my business? The property has a rental income of appx....
Ballistic evidence
[ 4 Answers ]
I have a few question about ballistics if you wouldn't mind answering.
What exactly does Ballistics mean?
When did the use of Ballistics begin?
What type of education is needed to work in the field of belistics?
How long does it usually take to be ballistics specialist?
How often does a...
View more questions
Search
|