Real-Life Decision Making -- Solution
You follow procedure and report the results as they are.
That was the real-life decision made by Gene N. Gietzen when he worked
for a police laboratory.
Gietzen re-analyzed the test results. They also confirmed that the suspect's
blood did not match the sample left at the crime scenes. Gietzen then reported
these results.
The detectives weren't thrilled with the results. They didn't have another
suspect and they couldn't suppress the lab results. Gietzen said that telling
the truth made things difficult for a while. "I was not very popular for quite
a period of time," he says.
Gietzen later found out that unknown to him, the detectives had also secretly
sent the samples to another lab for testing. If Gietzen had bowed to pressure
and lied about the results, he would have been found out. His reputation and
career would have been ruined.
Gietzen says it is important to always tell the truth: "Any forensic analyst
must be willing to report the results, no matter how those results affect
the case," he says. "Forensic analysts are objective, favoring neither the
prosecution nor defense."
Dr. W. Rowe at George Washington University's department of forensic science
agrees. He says that these types of dilemmas often happen. Usually, people
are not pressured to change (or lie) about the results. But when results aren't
clear, there is often pressure to "flavor" the way the results are reported
so that they sound like they are either pro-defense or pro-prosecution.