Imagine finding a murder scene with bloodstains on the floor, long red streaks running the length of the walls, and a dotted trail leading to the back door—all of which indicate that there is not a body there. What would you say in response? Investigators may have no other evidence to work with in this case but blood. Before 1955, bloodstain evidence was not admissible in a court of law because it was deemed untrustworthy.
Leukocytes, which make up less than 1% of our blood volume overall, can now be used to extract DNA profiles. The biological and physical characteristics, in addition to genetic profiles of blood, can provide detectives with a lot of information. The appropriate documentation, collection, and storage of blood evidence is essential as it may provide insights that could ultimately result in the case being resolved. Inappropriate treatment of blood evidence might compromise or destroy a possible source of facts for a case.
When properly collected and preserved, blood evidence can build a strong case that connects a particular individual to a criminal act. Blood evidence can also be utilised to prove or disprove its existence, based on witness statements or any comments the suspect may make. Blood evidence can also assist the investigator in deciding how to move forward with the case’s resolution. If blood evidence is collected, documented, and maintained appropriately, it can be presented to a jury or court years after the unlawful act.
Perhaps the most effective use of blood evidence is the ability to totally rule someone out as a potential suspect in a crime. The technology for analysing blood evidence has advanced rapidly in the last 20 years. In the early 1970s, most crime laboratories classified bloodstains using the ABO blood grouping method. This suggested that between 4 and 49% of people might have given blood. In the 1990s, most crime laboratories employed DNA analysis as their main technique for characterising bloodstains. These days, statistics enable us to identify a single blood donor from among millions or even billions.
A crime scene investigator must be knowledgeable about the bloodstain analysis technique or protocols provided by FBI labs, private labs, and their own crime lab. The value of bloodstain analysis, in essence, is not reduced to the sphere of scientific investigation but rather embodies the power of both empirical priority and legal examination. The face of forensics always changes with the appearance of new methods for the determination of bloodstain patterns, starting from Paul L. Kirk first research, advancing through laser trajectory analysis. However, the validity of bloodstain evidence as a source is very disputed, according to the researchers, subject to the interpretation nuances, human fallibility and developing standards of judicial review.
Importance, admissibility & challenges of bloodstain evidence
Bloodstain evidence stands at the peak of importance in crime scene investigations due to its power to offer very important clues concerning the accident scene and its participants. To begin with, blood spots increase the capacity of detectives to recreate the order of events, making it possible for them to create timelines, speculate on the positions of the people involved and guess the pattern of the dispute. Through the investigation of the dimensions, shape and placement of the blood stains, forensic scientists can make crucial diagnoses like the type of weapon, the direction of forces involved and the actions of both the victim and the culprit. Consequently, bloodstained evidence on a certain person identified the suspect and linked him to a crime scene.
Genomics profiling of bloodstains will provide vital genetic data including individual matches or searching for possible matches in databases This technique of forensics has redefined the open cases of previous years and even the ones where the traditional methods of investigation may not be fruitful. Therefore, bloodstain evidence may correspond or contradict the eyewitness accounts and probable statements of the suspects as it gives factual and real information which makes the findings of the investigation team reliable. Apart from that bloodstain patterns can disclose other important incident facts which will help to understand if secondary transfer has happened, there was post-mortem movement or the evidence was changed or concealed.
What it is all about forensic investigation is understanding the text written in blood. Bloodstain pattern analysis means the application of methods created to explain different bloodstain patterns. The size and form of the drops of blood to the directionality and the distribution of the stains – all the small details are the key to finding out the truth. The director of the museum may notice high-velocity spatter that can be linked to a gunshot wound and passive stain can suggest a different scenario. By employing a detailed study of the crime scene, forensic experts utilize the reconstruction of the event’s chronology, thus making the process of putting together the puzzle of the crime scene complete.
Technology and bloodstain analysis were not that compatible together for several decades, however, in the last few years high accuracy photography and imaging techniques help the professional to detect and analyse the trajectory of blood splatters and computational modelling gives a numerical approach to pattern interpretation. These innovations, in a way, do not only ensure the effectiveness of bloodstain interpretation but also portray its credibility as a piece of evidence to the law.
Regardless of its power, bloodstain analysis, by the same token, does have some constraints. Another interesting part is that we deal with a subjective nature of interpretation, and that provides some space for errors and contradictions. Consideration of factors, like contextual prejudice – a bias that analysts subconsciously apply and tilt their results to their beliefs or expectations – makes the situation more complicated. In addition, problems of contamination and of different kinds of environmental factors can influence the credibility of bloodstain evidence, bringing into question the quality of it during the proceedings. The level of legal parameters for admissibility of bloodstain evidence may be different in different jurisdictions which is just one among a pile of complications in this area.
Judicial precedents
State of NCT Delhi v. Sujeet Kumar [1]
The Delhi police investigated a severe case of rape and unnatural sexual activity involving a four-year-old girl living in a slum. DNA profiling was used to establish a connection between the perpetrator and the horrible crime of sexual abuse. Upon thorough examination of the comprehensive analysis of the child’s testimony and the several methodologies employed, the court concurred with the investigation findings, which were supported by DNA reports and other corroborating evidence. Consequently, the accused was deemed guilty, and the Trial Court’s previous decision to acquit the accused was overturned.
Surinder Singh v. State of Punjab[2]
In this instance, the blood stains of the defendants are gathered from the location. The defendant was found innocent of the accusation of homicide.
Binder Munda v. State[3]
If the blood stains on the dress of both parties are identical, it unequivocally indicates that both individuals are connected to the incident.
Saddak Hussain v. State (NCT Delhi) [4]
In this case, the accused was convicted of the offence against Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code which deals with murder. The prosecution employed the blood evidence to support their case of guilt. According to the report from the Forensic Science Laboratory, human blood is present on the clothes of the deceased. Notwithstanding the fact that there was no reactivity in the blood grouping, the judge held that the presence of blood is very relevant. The defendant suffered from evidential insufficiency. Importance: The presence of blood in itself can become valuable evidence even without a particular blood grouping being identified.
Why was the State of Ohio vs. Samuel Sheppard a stepping milestone?
The State of Ohio v. Samuel Sheppard [5] case marked a noteworthy achievement in the acknowledgement of bloodstain evidence inside the legal system. Dr. Paul Kirk, a criminal justice professor at the University of California, Berkeley, utilised his expertise in bloodstain pattern analysis to determine the exact positions of the offender and victim during the beating. Bloodstain pattern analysis is the field that examines the shapes, locations, and distribution of patterns to determine the actions and procedures that caused them.
Forensic scientists can analyse the evidentiary importance of seemingly random stains by studying the biological characteristics of blood, such as viscosity, surface tension, and flow, as well as its physical aspects, such as velocity and laws of motion. The sequence of events at the crime scene can be unveiled by extending this analysis and converting it into a reconstruction. We should thank Dr. Paul Kirk, because of him Sam Sheppard was acquitted and subsequently released from prison. Hence bloodstains can be considered as circumstantial evidence during investigation.
This case led down the following things:
1.Blood Pattern Analysis: The patterns indicated that Marilyn was attacked while lying down, and that the attacker was right-handed.
2. Places in Relation: The incident happened adjacent to the bed, judging by the bloodstains there. Had Dr. Sheppard tried to save his injured wife, the pattern of the spatter on his would have been expected.
3. Weapon Inference: The bloodstains, which indicated the use of a blunt object, confirmed the coroner’s conclusions.
Conclusion
In this lengthy review of the evidentiary significance of bloodstain pattern analysis in criminal scene investigation, we explored quite a good number of complexities, advancing methodologies, and significant ramifications for justice. By summarising the key points to look out for in the fundamental concept as shown here, such as the reliability of analytical techniques, legalistic point of view, technology, and the wider consequences of blood evidence, several critical insights have been made.
Conditional to the reliability and absolute accuracy of bloodstain pattern analysis techniques, they are an imperative part of a forensic investigative procedure. Though progress in technology has revolutionized the interpretation of bloodstain patterns with greater accuracy, issues of contextual biases and contamination keep haunting. Controlled and adherence to high-level science principles put forensic experts on the safe side which decreases the risk of invalid conclusions and therefore maintains judicial integrity.
Indeed, the legal and juridical viewpoint relevant to the admissibility of bloodstain evidence crystalizes the fact that there need to be definite standards and protocols to guarantee the fairness and reliability of court proceedings. Shifts in standards and requirements within various jurisdictions demand a thorough grasp of the intricacies associated with the relationship between the law and forensic science. Through the cooperation between forensic scientists and the practitioners in the law, it is possible to create a stable framework in which the values of fairness and equality are upheld.
In addition, furthering the evolution of technology keeps changing the bloodstain analysis area bringing novel tools and approaches to ensure the validity and accuracy of forensic evidence. Through the process of high-resolution imaging and computing, forensic experts can get a clear image of bloodstains and model the cases to reconstruct crime scenes with higher accuracy. Technology keeps evolving and it becomes really crucial to watch out for new strategies which will be based on principles of uncompromising scientific integrity and objectivity. The overarching repercussions of performing bloodstain analysis trump the laboratory framework, covering topics related to justice, responsibility, and general public trust.
Incorrect applications of techniques with consequences on the life stories of people and populations can be dramatic emphasizing the need for a strong control and supervision system. Through promoting transparency, accountability, and ongoing development, we can prevent bloodstain analysis from being a weak link in truth and justice-achieving mechanisms. Lastly, the importance of the scientific evidence in the identification of the crime scene cannot be refuted. Through the efforts of dealing with difficult aspects and shortcomings of this field, we can try to achieve the highest level of scientific independence, legal honesty, and ethical standards. Through synergic moves among different disciplines and sectors, we can fully benefit from bloodstain archives with a vigorous light of truth towards building a crime-free and just community.
[1] State of NCT Delhi v. Sujeet Kumar, CRL.A 1190/2014
[2] Surinder Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1989 SC 147
[3] Binder Munda v. State, 1992 CriLJ 3508
[4] Saddak Hussain v. State (NCT Delhi), 2019 260 DLT 523
[5] State of Ohio v. Samuel Sheppard, 352 U.S. 910 (1956)
Author: Dhruv Amogh Soste, BBA LLB student at Symbiosis Law School, Nagpur
