Ethics in Forensic

1
Ethics in Forensic Science

• Ethics and evidentiary law in forensics
• By- Mr. A/Aziz Ahmed(Sunabdi)
• (BSc, PGD, and MSc)
• May.2023

2
CHAPTER FIVE
BASICS in ETHICS

• Objective of the chapter
• At the end of this chapter the audience will be
  able to-
• Understanding of basic ethics what ethics is,
  theory of ethics, types of ethics, and the good
  and bad ethical behaviors of investigators, will
  be acquired

3
Ethics and Ethical Theories

• Ethics are defined as a set of moral obligations
  that define the principles of right and wrong
  conduct in a community or profession, and which
  can be used by individuals to guide their choices
  and behaviors.
• ETHICS is a branch of philosophy that addresses
  questions about morality, that is, concepts like
  good and bad, right and wrong, justice and
  injustice, and virtue and evil.
• The definition as set out above can be applied at
  three different levels, with different
  consequences
• 1. Personal ethics
• 2. Group ethics
• 3. Professional ethics

4

• 1. Personal ethics means the morals, values and
  beliefs of the individual.
• It can be positively and negatively influenced,
  both through experience and education, and
  training.
• 2. Group ethics is development of group
  behavior, sub-cultural patterns which cause
  subsequent pressure on new group members.
• This group behavior can lead to the discrediting
  /harm the reputation/ of an entire organization.

5

• 3. Professional ethics a codified set of rules
  of behavior for members of a particular
  profession.
• Many professions and communities have formalized
  ethical codes to guide professionals in their
  field
• The Hippocratic Oath doctors should do not
  harm to their patients.
• Professional engineers code of ethics hold
  paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the
  public.
• First law of robotics A robot may not injure a
  human being.

6

• A breach of ethics is considered a very serious
  offence punishable within the profession and
  sometimes also by law
• kinds of ethical theories
• Consequence-based
• Duty-based
• Moors Just-Consequentialist Theory

7

• Consequence-based Theory
• Espoused by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill
• Maximization of good
• Principle of social utility
• Ability to measure social utility
• Act utilitarianism
• Act should bring about greatest good for
  greatestnumber
• As long as good outweighs bad, no problem
• Rule utilitarianism
• Consequences of rules, not acts

8
Duty-based (deontological) theories

• Immanuel Kant
• Performance of duty doesn't necessarily lead to
  happiness
• Humans are rational creatures
• Humans are ends-in-themselves
• Humans have equal moral worth
• Treat individuals as ends, not means
• Act as though you would want your principle to be
  a universal law

9
Moors Just-Consequentialist Theory

• Combines elements of consequence-based,
  duty-based, and virtue ethics
• Prevent harm, support justice, rights, and duties
• Moors Ethical Framework of Just -Consequentialism
• A two-step strategy1. Deliberate/discuss over
  various policies from an impartial point of view
  to determine whether they meet the criteria for
  being ethical policies.
• A policy is ethical if it a. does not cause
  any unnecessary harms toindividual groups b.
  supports individual rights, the fulfilling of
  duties, etc

10

• 2. Select the best policy from the set of just
  policies arrived at the deliberation stage by
  ranking ethical policies in terms of benefits and
  justifiable(harms).
• In doing this, be sure to
• a. weigh carefully between the good
  consequences and the bad consequences in the
  ethical policies and b. distinguish between
  disagreements about facts and disagreements about
  principles and values, when deciding which
  particular ethical policy should be adopted
  (Knowledge about the facts surrounding a
  particular case should inform the decision-making
  process.)

11

• 3.2 Code of conduct for law enforcement
  officials
• The CCLEO consists of eight articles. (UN in its
  resolution 34/ 169 of 17 December 1979)
• It is not a treaty but the category of
  instruments that offer authoritative guidance to
  governments on issues related to human rights and
  criminal justice.
• Article1 states that LEOs shall at all times
  fulfill the duty imposed upon them by law
• Article 2 LEOs, in the performance of their
  duty, to respect and protect human dignity and
  maintain and uphold the human rights of all
  persons.
• Article 3 limits the use of force by LEOs to
  situations where it is strictly necessary and to
  the extent required for the performance of their
  duty.

12

• Article 4 states that matters of a confidential
  nature in the possession of LEOs shall be kept
  confidential, unless the performance of duty or
  the needs of justice strictly require otherwise.
• The nature of law enforcement duties places LEOs
  in apposition where they may obtain information
  relating to the private life of individuals, or
  information that could be harmful to the
  interests or reputation of others.
• The disclosure of such information other than for
  the needs of justice or the performance of duty
  is improper and law enforcement officials must
  refrain from making any such disclosure.

13

• Article 5 reiterates the prohibition of torture
  or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
  punishment.
• Art 6 relates to the duty to protect the health
  of persons deprived of their liberty and provide
  medical care whenever necessary.
• Art 7 forbids LEOs to commit any act of
  corruption and enjoins them to rigorously oppose
  and combat any such act.
• Art8 is the closing provision urging LEOs to
  respect the law.

14
The National Code of Professional Responsibility
for Forensic Science

• In 2010, the Education, Ethics, and Terminology
  Inter-Agency Working Group (EETIWG) of the
  National Science and Technology Councils
  Subcommittee on Forensic Science developed a
  National Code of Ethics and Professional
  Responsibility for the Forensic Sciences
  (NCEPRFS).
• forensic service provider must meet the
  requirements enumerated below
• Accurately represent his/her education, training,
  experience, and areas of expertise.
• Pursue professional competency through training,
  proficiency testing, certification, and
  presentation and publication of research findings

15

• 3. Commit to continuous learning in the forensic
  disciplines and stay abreast of new findings,
  equipment and techniques.
• 4. Promote validation and incorporation of new
  technologies, guarding against the use of
  non-valid methods in casework and the
  misapplication of validated methods.
• 5. Avoid tampering, adulteration, loss, or
  unnecessary consumption of evidentiary materials.
  
• 6. Avoid participation in any case where there
  are personal, financial, employment-related or
  other conflicts of interest

16

• 7. Conduct full, fair and unbiased examinations,
  leading to independent, impartial, and objective
  opinions and conclusions.
• 8. Make and retain full, contemporaneous, clear
  and accurate written records of all examinations
  and tests conducted and conclusions drawn, in
  sufficient detail to allow meaningful review and
  assessment by an independent person competent in
  the field.
• 9. Base conclusions on generally-accepted
  procedures supported by sufficient data,
  standards and controls, not on political pressure
  or other outside influence.

17

• 10. Do not render conclusions that are outside
  ones expertise.
• 11. Prepare reports in unambiguous terms, clearly
  distinguishing data from interpretations and
  opinions, and disclosing all known associated
  limitations that prevent invalid inferences or
  mislead the judge or jury.
• 12. Do not alter reports or other records, or
  withhold information from reports for strategic
  or tactical litigation advantage.
• 13. Present accurate and complete data in
  reports, oral and written presentations and
  testimony based on good scientific practices and
  validated methods.

18

• 14. Communicate honestly and fully, once a report
  is issued, with all parties (investigators,
  prosecutors, defense attorneys, and other expert
  witnesses), unless prohibited by law.
• 15. Document and notify management or quality
  assurance personnel of adverse events, such as an
  unintended mistake or a breach of ethical, legal,
  scientific standards, or questionable conduct.
• 16. Ensure reporting, through proper management
  channels, to all impacted scientific and legal
  parties of any adverse event that affects a
  previously issued report or testimony

19
Character of criminal Investigator

• 3.1 Good characteristics of a Criminal
  investigator
• good characteristics.
• Honesty
• Loyal to the constitution and other laws
• Respect human right
• Good moral and ethical standards
• Integrity
• Courage

20
Good character

• Impartial or fair
• Devoted to his/her profession
• Democratic attitude
• Law abiding in enforcement
• Imaginative
• Creative
• Persistent
• Self-discipline
• Knowledge of the law, etc

21
Bad characteristics of an investigator

• Seeking profit by victimizing others
• Assuming other people exist for him only to be
  used for his own advantage
• Whatever he may have been taught that about right
  and wrong has nothing to do with the conduct of
  his life
• Brutality the excessive or unreasonable use of
  force in dealing with suspects and offender or
  citizens

22

• Shakedowns the practice of appropriating
  expensive items for personal use during an
  investigation of a break-in, burglary or unlocked
  door and attributing their lose to criminal
  activity
• Perjury testifying in court falsely and attempts
  to circumvent ( to find a way of overcoming or
  avoiding) the rules

23

• Abuse of authority the tremendous power and
  discretion given to the police provide numerous
  opportunities for the police to abuse their power
  or authority. For example, on article 28 of the
  CPC, the police have vested the power to release
  on bail relying on certain preconditions.
• Other misconducts like rudeness, racism,
  corruption, violence, mistreating victims,
  suspects, witnesses and others, conducting
  coercive interviews that are physical or
  psychological coercion

24
Role of Attorney(Lawyers)

• Attorney shall at all times maintain the honor
  and dignity of their profession as essential
  agents of the administration of justice.
• The duties of lawyers towards their clients shall
  include
• (a) Advising clients as to their legal rights and
  obligations, and as to the working of the legal
  system in so far as it is relevant to the legal
  rights and obligations of the clients
• (b) Assisting clients in every appropriate way,
  and taking legal action to protect their
  interests
• (c) Assisting clients before courts, tribunals or
  administrative authorities, where appropriate.

25

• Attorney, in protecting the rights of their
  clients and in promoting the cause of justice,
  shall seek to uphold human rights and fundamental
  freedoms recognized by national and international
  law and shall at all times act freely and
  diligently in accordance with the law and
  recognized standards and ethics of the legal
  profession.
• Lawyers shall always loyally respect the
  interests of their clients
• ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT
• Is behavior by an attorney that conflicts with
  established rules of professional conduct and is
  punishable by disciplinary measures

26

• Attorney misconduct may include 
• making statements outside of court in an attempt
  to influence a proceeding.
• refusing to represent a client for political or
  professional motives,
• false or misleading statements, knowingly
  accepting worthless lawsuits, hiding evidence,
  abandoning a client, failing to disclose all
  relevant facts, arguing a position while
  neglecting to disclose prior law which might
  counter the argument, or having sex with a client
• Eg. Duke Lacrosse case,2006
• Fedral prosecutors, 2007

27
CHAPTER SIX
ETHICS IN FORENSIC SCIENCSE

• Objective of the chapter
• At the end of this chapter the audience will be
  able to-
• Understand research ethics in science, ethical
  consideration for scientific conduct
• Know fundamental ethical principle for scientific
  writing(research)
• Acquire the concept of Ethics in Forensic Science

28
Research Ethics in Science

• Ethics in Science is maintaining honesty and
  integrity in all stages of scientific conduct.
• includes all aspects of scientific activity, such
  as experimentation, testing, education, data
  collection, data analysis, data storage, data
  sharing, peer review, etc.
• Also other activities that have a direct bearing
  on science, such as government funding or
  staffing of research teams

29
Ethical considerations for scientific conduct

• All behaviors involved in the research process,
  such as developing a theory, collecting data, and
  testing hypotheses, are subject to ethical
  considerations, codified and uncodified.
• Research involving human subjects in institutions
  that receive federal research funding must
  receive ethical clearance by an independent
  review board.
• IRB(Institutional Review Board) must approve any
  research with human subjects before it is
  initiated.

30

• An IRB evaluates
• the extent to which participation in a study
• is voluntary,
• does not exert physical or psychological stress,
  and
• not cause other kinds of damage to participants
• whether participants must give consent regarding
• how their data will be used
• how their data will be reported
• how the data will be protected in terms of
  anonymity or confidentiality
• whether participants have the right to withdraw
  from participation at any time.
• how data is stored and analysed
• Involves ownership, storage and backup, privacy,
  confidentiality, access, and reuse.

31
Ethical considerations for scientific writing

• A subset of ethical issues in scientific conduct
  that relates only to the reporting of research
• Very important part of scientific ethics because
  it is typically only through reported research
  that an ethical issue is revealed
• we typically cannot learn about data fabrication
  or amendment until those data are disclosed.
• We cannot identify a lack of attribution of
  credit until an unnamed contributor sees it in
  writing

32
1. Plagiarism

• the wrongful appropriation, close imitation, or
  purloining and publication of another authors
  language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions and
  their representation as ones own work.
• the act of passing off someone else's work as
  your own, whether intentionally or
  unintentionally.
• The most common form of scientific misconduct

33
Forms of plagiarism

• Intentional plagiarism
• a writer knowingly lifts text directly from other
  authors work without giving appropriate credit.
• Duplicate publication
• an author submits for publication a previously
  published work as if it were original.
• Self-plagiarism
• a writer copies large parts of an earlier
  manuscript word for word into a new manuscript.
• can occur when individuals pursue large programs
  of research over many years on the same topic, so
  they are constantly building on their own work
  and in their own language.

34
Protecting against plagiarism

1. Always acknowledge the sources and contributions
   to your ideas.
2. Enclose in quotation marks any passage of text
   that is directly taken from another authors work
   and acknowledge that author in an in-text
   citation.
3. Acknowledge every source you use in writing,
   whether you paraphrase it, summarise it, or quote
   it directly.
4. When paraphrasing or summarising other authors
   work, reproduce the meaning of the original
   authors ideas or facts as closely as possible
   using your own words and sentence composition.
5. Do not copy sections of your previously published
   work into a new manuscript without citing the
   publication and using quotation marks

35
2. Recognition of co-author contributions

• Concerns the appropriate acknowledgement (not too
  much or too little) of collaborators substantial
  contributions to a piece of scholarly work.
• An ethical issue that appears frequently in
  scientific work because collaboration is the
  norm, not the exception.
• Working alone means less productivity
• Working alone means having to do every thing well
• Collaboration means sharing workload,
  complementing skills, broadening the domain of
  interest

36

• Making co-authorship decisions is important
  because on the one hand co-authorship confers
  credit to individuals for their contribution to
  academic tasks, which can have academic, social,
  and financial implications but on the other
  hand, co-authorship also implies responsibility
  and accountability for published works.
• Recognizing co-author contributions
  appropriately be difficult to deal with because
  the correct attribution of credit sounds easy but
  is hard to identify in practice

37

• Ethical issues relating to co-authorship
• Coercion authorship
• occurs when intimidation is used to gain
  authorship credit, such as when a senior person
  pressures a more junior person to include the
  senior persons name on a paper to which he or
  she has not contributed enough to qualify for
  authorship.
• Gift authorship
• Occurs when individuals are given recognition as
  co-authors without having made substantial
  contributions, often for reasons like
  acknowledging friendship, gaining favour, or
  giving the paper more legitimacy by adding
  well-known senior researchers to the list of
  authors

38
Appropriate use of language

• Refers to the wording of scientific reports so
  they are not biased in terms of gender, race,
  orientation, culture, or any other
  characteristics.
• Stipulates using gender-responsible,
  ethnicity-responsible, and inclusive language
  wherever possible.
• Guidelines
• Specificity
• describe specific behaviors rather than
  stereotypes e.g., calling a behavior dominant
  and opinionated instead of typically male.
• Labelling
• Refer to concrete labels rather than abstract
  class tags, e.g., referring to countries
  populationsMexicans or Chineseinstead of
  classes like Hispanics or Asians
• Professional acknowledgments
• Use professional classifications, not personal
  labels, like medical practitioner or doctor
  instead of female doctor.

39

• The following are Six Fundamental Ethical
  Principles for Scientific Research
• Scientific honesty
• Scientists should not commit scientific fraud by,
  for example, fabricating, fudging, trimming,
  cooking, destroying, or misrepresenting data.
• Carefulness
• Scientists should avoid careless errors and
  sloppiness in all aspects of scientific work
• Intellectual freedom
• Scientists should be free to pursue new ideas and
  criticize old ones and conduct research on
  anything they find interesting

40

• Openness
• Whenever possible, scientists should share data,
  results, methods, theories, equipment, and so on
  allow people to see their work and be open to
  criticism
• Attribution of credit
• Scientists should not plagiarise the work of
  other scientists. They should give credit where
  credit is due but not where it is not due.
• Public responsibility
• Scientists should report research in the public
  media when the research has an important and
  direct bearing on human happiness and when the
  research has been sufficiently validated by
  scientific peers.

41
Forensic Scientist Ethics

• Forensic Science is the study and application of
  science to matters of law (criminal and civil)
• Includes the business of providing
  timely,accurate, and thorough information to all
  levels of decision makers in our criminal justice
  system
• Also called criminalistics
• As with other witnesses, forensic scientists
  obliged to tell the truth.
• It must attempt to state facts without distortion
• Omission of relevant information (statistics)
• Allowing incorrect inferences to be made
• A witnesss expertise allows them to properly
  present the evidence

42

• It applies the principles and techniques of the
  physical and natural sciences to the analysis of
  the many types of evidence that may be recovered
  during a criminal investigation.
• May also provide expert court testimony Known as
  an expert witness
• expert witness is Individual whom the court
  determines possesses knowledge relevant to the
  trial

43
The Role of the Forensic Examiner

• A forensic examiner refers to any professional
  who examines and interprets physical evidence
  with the expectation of courtroom testimony.
• Forensic examiners analyze evidence in a
  scientific manner to interpret the results
  objectively and report their findings faithfully.
• Forensic examiners employ the physical evidence
  as a tool to sift out case theories that can
  either be supported or refuted, and report this
  to the decision makers.
• The first onus of the forensic examiner is to
  establish the objective facts of a case as
  determined by a scientific examination of the
  evidence.
• Forensic examiners educate investigators,
  attorneys, courts, and juries with findings. They
  do not have an investment in the outcome.

44
What are some common ethical standards for
forensic scientists to follow?

• Accurate representation of qualifications
• Maintain the integrity of the evidence
• True and accurate representation of data
• Clear and complete documentation
• Impartiality of the examination
• Impartiality of testimony
• Confidentiality and disclosure
• Reporting of colleagues who violate the
  professions ethical code.

45
What are some common ethical issues for forensic
scientists?

• Misrepresenting qualifications or credentials
• Pressured testimony (adrenaline factor)
• Omitting unfavorable information
• Lying about the knowledge of the evidence planted
  
• Falsifying the data or notes
• Biased examination

46
Why do you think forensic scientists mishandle,
manipulate, or misrepresent evidence?

• Own personal agenda
• Pressure from agencies in control of crime lab
  most crime labs controlled by government agency
  so would be on prosecutors side
• .

47
Crime Scene

• A crime scene is any physical scene, anywhere,
  that may provide potential evidence to an
  investigator.
• It may include a persons body, any type of
  building, vehicles, and objects found at those
  location.
• Primary crime scene
• secondary crime scene

48

• The Crime Scene Team
• A group of professional investigators,
  eachtrained in a variety of special disciplines
• Team members include
• First police officer on the scene
• Medics (life supporter) if necessary,
• Investigator(s)
• Medical examiner
• Photographer and/or Field Evidence Technician
• Lab Experts

49
Admissibility of Evidence

• In order for scientific evidence to be useful,
  the method must be reliable.
• Two slightly varied tests are used to determine
  admissibility
• Frye test (1923)
• Is the scientific theory generally accepted in
  the scientific community?
• Is the scientific method used generally accepted
  in the scientific community?
• Has the technique been applied correctly?

50

• Daubert test (1993)
• Has the scientific theory or technique been
  tested?
• Has the scientific theory or technique been
  subjected to peer review and publication?
• What are the known or potential error rates of
  the theory or technique when applied?
• Do standards and controls exist and are they
  maintained?
• Has the theory or technique been generally
  accepted in the relevant scientific community?

51
CHAPTER SEVEN
EVIDENTIARY LAW IN FORENSIC

• Objective of the chapter
• At the end of this chapter audience will be able
  to-
• Understand Forensic Science and the legal process
• Understand probability in in Forensic science
• Acquire the concept of Forensic result in the
  view of evidentiary law

52
Forensic Science and the legal process

• When there is a criminal complaint, law
  enforcement investigators are responsible for
  conducting a criminal investigation.
• To assist with this effort, it is necessary to
  examine the physical evidence.
• Evidence generated through science is called
  forensic evidence
• Forensic evidence is circumstantial evidence
• E.g. Finding a suspects blood at a crime scene
  implies the suspect was also at the crime scene.

53
Litigation as history

• There were three types of devices of crime
  investigation or detection under the old
  procedural law of Ethiopia. These were known as
•  leba shay,
• afarsata,(gathering to screen criminals ) and
• the investigations undertaken by the market
  guards (arada zabagna) and secret guards
  (mistir zabagna)

54

• Litigation, at its initial stage, was a voluntary
  and spontaneous form of arbitration.
• A party to a dispute was entitled by law to call
  upon any passer-by to decide his case.
• However, if a decision could not be obtained
  which was satisfactory to both parties, they
  would go to the regular court

55
Modern Steps in Pursuing Justice

• If a crime is committed these are the steps
  totake while pursuing justice
• Police investigate what happened
• Information is collected
• Crime scene is documented and searched
  forevidence
• All info is assembled into a report and sent
  toDistrict attorney
• Investigation continues until probable cause
  isestablished
• An arrest warrant is issued for the suspect
• The suspect is arrested
• Individual is booked, fingerprinted,
  photographedand informed about his/her rights

56
The Miranda Rights

• Before a law enforcement officer may question a
  suspect regarding the possible commission of a
  crime, he or she must inform the detainee about
  his or her Miranda rights, making sure the
  detainee understands them.
• Warning of Rights
• You have the right to remain silent and refuse
  toanswer questions
• Anything you do or say may be used against you
  inthe court of law

57

• You have the right to consult an attorney before
  speaking to the police and to have your attorney
  present during questioning now or in the future
• If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be
  appointed for you before any questioning if you
  wish
• If you decide to answer questions now without an
  attorney present, you will still have the right
  to stop answering at any time until you talk to
  an attorney
• Knowing and understanding your rights as I have
  explained them to you, are you willing to answer
  my questions without an attorney present?

58
Forensic Science, Probability and the Law

• In any forensic science investigation we need
  to deal with uncertainty
• How likely is it that the recovered trace came
  from the suggested source?
• - Fibers from a coat
• - Paint on a jacket
• - Hair from an individual
• We need a way of assessing the likelihood of a
  specific event
• Given the use to which our assessment is being
  put, it is desirable that our assessment is not
  wholly based on intuition.

59

• Science of statistics refers to two distinct but
  linked areas of knowledge
• - Counts, analysis of events, etc.
• -Examination of uncertainty
• We are interested in the second of these
• We can define two types of probability
• - Aleatory deduce from observation of a system
• Ideal
• - Epistemic induce from observation of a system
• Real

60

• Deduction - Conclusion from stated premises from
  the general to the specific
• Induction - Deriving general principles from
  facts or instances specific to the general
• In forensic science we are generally concerned
  with the likelihood of one specific event
• Eg. What is the probability it will rain
  tomorrow? How might we arrive at that decision?
  
• - Weather today, yesterday, this week, etc. -
  Month - Season - Last year - Etc. Some principle
  in Forensic..(If the weather today..)

61

• A way of doing this is to consider two competing
  propositions for a particular event and then
  assess the probability of the observations in
  each case
• We can then calculate a Likelihood Ratio (LR)
• In forensic science we can frame propositions
  like these to consider trace evidence
• What is the probability of the observations we
  have made (E) if the prosecution hypothesis (Hp)
  is correct and the suspect did leave the trace?
• What is the probability of the observations we
  have made (E) if the defense hypothesis (Hd) is
  correct and the trace was left by a random other
  person?

62

• In mathematical language the Likelihood Ratio
  (LR) is
• P ( E /Hp )
• LR
• P ( E/ Hd )
• Lets assume that the probability of making one
  particular observation if the prosecution
  hypothesis (Hp) is correct is 0.9
• Therefore, the probability of making the same
  observation if Hd is true is 0.1
• What is the LR?

63

• LR 9
• A LR which is greater than 1 indicates that the
  observations are more likely if Hp is true than
  Hd
• Now lets assume that the probability of making
  one particular observation if the prosecution
  hypothesis Hp is correct is 0.5
• Therefore, the probability of making the same
  observation if Hd is true is 0.5
• What is the LR

64

• LR 1
• This means the evidence is of no assistance
• It is equally likely to make the observations in
  each case
• Forensic Result in the view of evidentiary law
• Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine is
  applicable for Forensic result.
• The doctrine extends the exclusionary rule to
  make evidence inadmissible in court if it was
  derived from evidence that was illegally
  obtained.

65

• Making conclusions without considering other
  possible explanations because
• Identical scientific results can be presented
  differently in court, so avoid being overly
  definitive or overly inconclusive
• Example
• The gun appeared to be 2.2 meters from the
  wall.
• Problem
• This is overly inconclusive. If it was measured
  to be 2.2 meters, just say that.

66
Fraud Forensic result may occurs

• Forensic fraud occurs when forensic examiners
  provide sworn testimony, opinions, or documents
  bound for court that contain deceptive or
  misleading information, findings, opinions, or
  conclusions, deliberately offered in order to
  secure an unfair or unlawful gain.
• Forensic examiners can be cross-categorized as
  having used one or more of the three general
  approaches to committing fraud
• Simulators those examiners who physically
  manipulate physical evidence or related forensic
  testing.
• Dissemblers those examiners who exaggerate,
  embellish, lie about, or otherwise misrepresent
  findings.
• Pseudoexperts those examiners who fabricate or
  misrepresent their credentials(expertise).

67

• This is all about the BS Assignment
• Thank you for the time you have with us!!!