Brief the case of Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319 (2006) - Coursework Example

However Holmes denied the charges and confessed that the crime was committed by a third party named Jimmy Mc Caw White. Holmes was of the opinion that the police framed him in this crime. Defendant also produces several witnesses who claimed that the third party was found in the premises of the crime scene during the hours of crime. Holmes produced several witnesses to prove that he was innocent in this case and was trapped by the police. He also asserted that the forensic results were manipulated by poor handling by the police officer.

Issue: Is Holmes guilty for the death of the old women in South Carolina? Any case in order to be justified needs solid evidence against the person who is guilty. Moreover there is argument from the defendant that police his trying to frame him .Holmes suggested that The crime was committed by a third party and also produced witnesses for the same. The only proof against Holmes was the palm print, fiber of clothing and DNA elements found at the vicinity and on victim respectively. .It was a known fact that the police officer handling the case dealt with evidence collection in a negligent manner.

He collected the samples with bare hand and henceforth the results were not trust worthy. The issue before the court is that, on what basis they can prove the guiltiness of the defendant as to the crime. How can the court claim that Holmes committed the crime on the women? Court draws conclusion based on evidence found at the crime scene .With regard to this case all the forensic evidence provided was unreliable due to the poor handling of samples by the police officer. Rule: According to federal rule of evidence, rule 702 is a key one.

Cornell University of law(2010) states that “If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case”.

Analysis: The Federal rule of evidence is crucial here as the whole case is centered around the validity of the forensic evidence found on the vicinity and victim. Once a crime is committed there should be strong evidence against the defendant in order to sentence the defendant. Even though, the evidence is found, the authenticity of it cannot be established due to the manipulation of them by the police officer. . The forensic result of the crime scene was not authentic as the police officer collected the samples without using gloves.

This is against the law as samples are not obtained following the principles laid down by the civil procedure. Since the reliability of the evidence is very questionable, the court cannot pass any order against Holmes which prove him guilty Conclusion: Since the U.S. Supreme Court was not satisfactory about the credibility of the forensic results, there are no grounds to accuse the defendant of the crime. At the same time the probability of the involvement of the third party was ruled out on the basis of evidence found on the crime scene.

Finally it can be concluded that Holmes involvement in the rape and murder could not be established due to lack of genuine evidence. Work cited Law School, Cornell University. (2010, December).