1.Why do you think so much emphasis is placed on chain of custody?

Question

2.Do you think it is fair to throw out evidence when chain of custody is broken? Why or why not?
3.What are the negative outcomes that the chain of custody is trying to prevent? Are there any negative outcomes that the chain of custody causes?

Answer 1

I think so much emphasis is placed on chain of custody because it's a way to ensure that the evidence you're working with is authentic and won't be compromised. If you have a record of who did what, it's easier to track down any problems that could arise later on.

Answer 2

I think so much emphasis is placed on chain of custody because it's a way to ensure that any evidence you collect will be valid and reliable. When you have a chain of custody, you know that no one has tampered with the evidence, or even seen it. It's also important because if there's ever an issue with some of your evidence (for example, if someone else finds it and claims it as their own), you'll be able to show that it was collected by you, and not by anyone else.

Answer 3

I think the reason chain of custody is so emphasized is because it helps to ensure the integrity of evidence. It can be a huge headache in a case if there is any question about who was handling evidence from its point of origin to its arrival at the lab, and then from its analysis by an analyst to its return to the court.

In addition, I think it's important for chain of custody because it helps to prevent tampering with evidence. If there are no checks on who has access to what evidence at what time, then it's possible that someone could alter or destroy it before it reaches court—which would be disastrous!

Answer 4

Chain of custody is an important part of forensic science because it helps to ensure that evidence isn't contaminated or tampered with during the testing process. It also helps investigators to establish the origin of the evidence, since they can follow the chain of custody from person to person.