Using DNA Evidence Analysis

However, the using of DNA evidence to judge the offender has to be used very careful. It is possible that the DNA evidence from the testimony is planted. For example, the O.J. Simpson case that the lab officer planted the DNA evidence. The American Supreme Court ruled out that evidence because it was obtained from illegal doing, even if it is proved that it’s the Simpson’s blood. Simon A. Cole note that the Simpson case was not concerned with only the admissibility of DNA evidence but also was related to the issues of race, class and gender in the United States. Therefore, the DNA evidence is accepted as well and can be used as evidence to prove the guilt of the offender especially the serious case such as murder or rape.

In common law,

Werner J. Einstadter provides that “... the overall policy goal of the classical due process model is to administer justice. Therefore, the court will emphasize equality between the parties, protect the individual's sovereignty by assuming innocence, and provide rules protecting offenders against error and arbitrary use of power.” Moreover, this theory against the use of state power illegally. So, this theory forms the opposite theory of crime control.

Herbert L. Packer describes “The Due Process Model encounters its rival on the Crime Control Model's own ground in respect to the reliability of fact-finding processes. The Crime Control Model, as we have suggested, places heavy reliance on the ability of investigative and prosecutorial officers, acting in an informal setting in which their distinctive skills are given full sway, to elicit and reconstruct a tolerably accurate account of what actually took place in an alleged criminal event.”

In particular, the search conducted by the police officer and the public prosecutors, or correctional officer. These legal officers act is it to secure or not. Because the practices of the police and prosecutors conducted in a private place that may be used to deceive, coerce or plant false

If the criminal process’s disciplinary is effective to prevent crime. The crime control theory would result in the state official is likely to violate the freedom of the people easily.

The state official is authorized to use the extensive compulsory legal in order to effectively prevent crime. The result is that the court does not agree to hear evidence obtained illegally that will not appear at all or are very sparse. The court will hold the value of the evidence rather than to relinquish valuable witness. Authority acts to prevent the abuse of the freedom of the