Question

name at least one way that each of these played a role in the wrongful conviction: uncertainty: bias: confidence:

Explanation:

1. For Uncertainty: Forensic evidence (like imperfect eyewitness identification with unclear details) that lacks definitive proof can lead investigators to fill gaps with assumptions, contributing to wrongful conviction.
2. For Bias: Investigative bias, where law enforcement focuses only on evidence that supports a pre-selected suspect and ignores exculpatory evidence, can skew the case toward a wrongful conviction.
3. For Confidence: Overconfident testimony from experts (e.g., a forensic analyst overly certain of flawed evidence like bite mark analysis) can persuade juries to convict an innocent person.

Answer:

• Uncertainty: Ambiguous forensic evidence (e.g., unclear eyewitness descriptions) leads investigators to make unsubstantiated assumptions targeting an innocent person.
• Bias: Investigative confirmation bias, where officials only pursue evidence that supports their initial suspect and dismiss contradictory proof.
• Confidence: Overconfident, unvalidated expert testimony (e.g., flawed forensic analysis presented as definitive) convinces juries of guilt.