Introduction
Forensic anthropologists mostly use the pelvis and the femur as instruments for examining age and sex. Elements of the pelvis may combine with femur to avail accurate projection of the postcranial bones. Studies have been performed to investigate race disparities in the pelvis when the skull, the normal was of examining race, is unavailable. These studies have suggested that pelvis can be used to significantly estimate race of an unidentified person. However, these studies fail to explain whether these assessments are accurate enough to neglect the impacts of expert errors during observation and data collection. Since the procedure in which expert testimony is considered reliable in court has become must stricter following: the Frye v. the United States, in 1923; Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, in 1993; General Electric Company v. Joiner, in 1997, Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, in 1999. (Grivas and Komar 773), it is of significance to ensure that evidence used in court are reliable and fully explained. The first case that was linked to the admissibility of expert evidence was the Frye v. the United States, in 1923. In Frye, the court held that for a specific scientific testimony to be admissible as evidence, the testimony should be recognized in the scientific community. The second case was Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, in 1993. In this case, the court held that expert evidence should be based on a reliable footing and applicable to the issue at hand. The third case was General Electric Company v. Joiner, in 1997. Joiner reinforced the authority of the judge in issues of expert testimony by providing a differential abuse of discretion standard. The fourth case was that of Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, in 1999. The Kumho case expanded the use of Daubert and Joiner guidelines to any expert evidence. One significant standard addressing admissibility of evidence is Evidence Rule 702. Evidence Rule 702 presents a guideline for qualifying expert witness and eliminating bias in expert testimony. Besides, Rule 702 expresses the need for reliability function against the design rule so as to balance the necessities of upholding an adversarial system and eliminating bias. The rule prevents judges from using speculations presented by experts because speculation is unreliable.
The proposed study will assess the methods of examining race using pelvic and femur so as to discuss their reliability and usefulness in the court of law. The overwhelming levels of racial discrimination occur in the criminal justice system where there is an uneven representation of the African American in the prison system. For every 100,000 African American, 4,347 are under correctional control as compared to 678 per 100,000 white (Brown et al. 170)). One out over fifteen African. Twenty-five percent of African American above the age of eighteen years are currently in prision compared one percent of every white race. There are more African American currently under correctional control than were enslaved in the 1850s (Spohn 79). Practices of discrimination due to wrongful conviction as a result of expert analysis are considered aberrational occurrences. These assumed abnormalities within the criminal justice system accentuate the warranted thesis that identifies adjudication primarily by legal factors like criminal history, crime type, and the severity of the crime while ignoring race or extra-legal factors (Spohn 78). Consistent with the notion of disparity, Spohn (88) identified either leniency in sentencing towards African American or find no sentencing disparity based on race. The proposed study will address concerns surrounding racial discrimination and suggest measures to prevent racial discrimination. The study will hypothesis that there is no statistical significance in pelvic assessments between racial groups in the United States.
Method
Bello and Soligo (1545) contend that qualitative research can be used as a guideline for quantitative study in either affirming the designed hypothesis or assisting measurements. In the proposed study, focus groups will facilitate the development and creation of the study inquiries utilized as a part of the quantitative stage. I will have a discussion with a focus group of criminology experts at the correction facilities and prisons so as to design a questionnaire.
Both the items derived from the focus group and the literature should never be incorporated into the research questionnaire without pre-test of the content. Pilot testing will be undertaken on the small sample so as to improve item variables as well as eliminating the likely problems associated with them. In the proposed study, the dimension and items utilized by the model will be both from the literature and the focus group. To eliminate issues related to the questionnaire, a draft questionnaire will be used to my friend and family members. The pre-test significantly will assist me to understand how the questionnaire takes to finish and will present the obvious problems associated with wording and accompanying guidelines. Besides, the pilot test will make me more familiar with the likely problems during the collection of data as well as how to avoid bias governing the survey. I will also able to identify questions that trigger problems due to the need of translations and clarification.
The participants will have their questionnaire consisting of five fragments, the initial of which consists of three sections. This will be utilized to gather data on parole status to sentencing, the status of employment before the arrest, education status before the arrest, and parental incarceration. The second part consisted of statements, developed to assess each respondent’s opinion on the significance of each statement using the 5-point tool of Likert. The third segment will be utilized to assess participant’s anticipation of the judiciary system using the 5-point tool of Likert. The fourth part will examine the perception of the assessment tool with the 5-point tool of Likert. The final segment of the feedback form will be used to collect individual information about the respondent such as level of education, age, income, ethnic origin as well as occupation.
I will use statistical package for window application to analyze the collected data. This software’s has the capabilities to analyze data fully and flexibly. Before using SPSS, I will code the data with variables names so as to simplify the process of entering the data. Provided that this study will involve human subjects, I will implement strategies that will make the study a success. I will reach the participants and introduced myself, advised what the research is all about. I will also guarantee the participants that the material provided was only for educational use. I will then allowed the study participants to answer the questions then returned the following day to collect the filled questioners and assist them where necessary.
Results
The proposed study will compare statistical significance results from previous studies, especially of African American to whites. The difference in statistical significance will be calculated from the reported mean and standard deviation so as to compare to the proposed study’s mean. I will apply the range rule which points out that standard deviation of a sample is near to twenty-five percent of the data range: S =(maximum – minimum)/4. I expect African American to have more variable scores than the whites. I also expect the hypothesis of the study population to be normally distributed. I the P-value will be less than the chosen alpha value (0.05), I will reject the null hypothesis of the study population. If the p-values if greater or equal to the chosen alpha value, I will accept the null hypothesis.
Discussion
The overwhelming levels of racial discriminations occur in the criminal justice system where there are an uneven representation of the African American in the prison system. Since the procedure in which expert testimony is considered reliable in court has become much stricter following: the Frye v. the United States, in 1923; Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, in 1993; General Electric Company v. Joiner, in 1997, Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, in 1999. (Grivas and Komar 773), it is of significance to ensure that evidence used in court are reliable and fully explained. The proposed study seeks to examine whether the forensic anthropologist understands the guideline stipulated by the Daubert and Kumho guidelines of expert witness testimony. From the interviews, I expect to find no statistical significance, in using pelvic approach, between racial groups. Evaluating the experts understanding of the Daubert principle of evidence admissibility will reinforce their use of pelvic instruments in legal cases.
References
Bello, Silvia M., and Christopher Soligo. “A New Method for the Quantitative Analysis of Cutmark Micromorphology.” Journal of Archaeological Science 35. (2008):1542-1552. Print.
Brown, Michael K., et al. Whitewashing Race: The Myth of a Color-Blind Society. Berkeley: University of California Press. 2003. Print.
Daniel, Reginald G. “Race and Multiraciality.” Race and the Obama Phenomenon: The Vision of a More Perfect Multiracial Union. Ed. Reginald G. Daniel and Hettie V. Williams. Mississippi: University Press of Mississippi, 2014. N. pag. Print.
Grivas, Christopher R., and Debra A. Komar. “Kumho, Daubert, and the Nature of Scientific Inquiry: Implications for Forensic Anthropology.” Journal of Forensic Science 53.4 (2008): 771-776. Print.
LaFrentz, Chandra D., and Cassia Spohn. “Who Is Punished More Harshly in Federal Court? The Interaction of Race/Ethnicity, Gender, Age, and Employment Status in the Sentencing of Drug Offenders.” Justice Research Policy 8.2 (2006): 25-56. Print.
Spohn, Cassia. “The Effects of the Offender’s Race, Ethnicity, and Sex on Federal Sentencing Outcomes in the Guidelines Era.” Law and Contemporary Problems 76.1 (2013): 75-105. Print.