Some believe that new science related to criminal forensics should be used to look at old cases. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many sectors have progressed in the way they function with the advancement of science and technology. Some states that incorporating advanced technology in the present will be helpful in finding forensic evidence of criminal offences that happened in the past. In

this

essay, I will discuss how scientific evidence helps in solving past crimes and the reason why some may be against

this

notion. On one hand, high-tech devices can help in solving unresolved crimes in the past.

For example

, DNA and fingerprint analysis are two main methods that are used in homicidal investigations and their ability to provide plenty of details just by using an intricate element like one tiny hair strand or a drop of blood has revolutionized criminal forensic investigations.

Furthermore

, these devices can provide accurate and efficient data which will be beneficial during a criminal investigation

thus

, narrowing down the disparity of wrongful accusations and serving justice to the victims.

On the other hand

, digging around a criminal investigation of the past is overwhelming and mentally torturing to the victim’s family.

For example

, it takes decades for families to move on after a loss of an individual or a beloved item of theirs. Even a slight trigger could be detrimental to the mental health of those who are living in the present day, so, some families are gravitating towards finding closure rather than finding the real criminal. Using new approaches of science to solve past crimes is suggested by a few. These scientifically advanced theories may help in generating sequences that are highly specific in narrowing down the murder suspects.

However

, some may refuse to use these techs as they have already found closure in their past tragedies. So, using new gadgets in resolving past criminal activities have both benefits and drawbacks which should be addressed.