Between science and subjectivity: an assessment of the misinterpretation of forensic evidence by legal professionals in Canada and beyond

This research paper examines the challenges surrounding the interpretation of forensic evidence within the courtroom. Focusing on the implications of flawed interpretations and a potential framework to interpret forensic evidence for legal professionals, this research attempts to answer the questions: how is forensic evidence misinterpreted in the Canadian legal system, and can a workable framework be developed to assess the misinterpretation. For this paper, secondary research was conducted where data was collected from existing peer- reviewed sources. Literature was used primarily from Canada with a less focus on other adversarial legal systems. The paper critically examines the various factors contributing to erroneous interpretations, including human errors, court oversight failures, and inherent weaknesses in forensic evidence, and resulting wrongful convictions. Through an evaluation of subjective and objective standards of interpretation, this paper recommends a framework to be used by legal professionals in the interpretation of forensic evidence. As further recommendations, the paper highlights the importance of rigorous scrutiny and continuous education on forensic evidence analysis to mitigate the risk of wrongful convictions. This research aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of the complexities inherent in forensic evidence interpretation and advocate for measures to ensure fairness and accuracy in legal proceedings.