In the section about the identification and significance of physical evidence, the text asserts that simple rules cannot be

In the section about the identification and significance of physical evidence, the text asserts that simple rules cannot be devised for defining what constitutes a thorough and foolproof analytical scheme. Why not?

Paragraph from the textbook FOR REFERENCE:

Simple rules cannot be devised for defining what constitutes a thorough and foolproof ana-lytical scheme. Each type of evidence obviously requires different tests, and each test has a different degree of specificity. Thus, one substance could conceivably be identified by one test, whereas another may require a combination of five or six different tests to arrive at an identifica-tion. In a science in which the practitioner has little or no control over the quality and quantity of the specimens received, a standard series of tests cannot encompass all possible problems and pitfalls. So, the forensic scientist must determine at what point the analysis can be concluded and the criteria for positive identification satisfied; for this, the forensic scientist must rely on knowledge gained through education and experience. Ultimately, the conclusion will have to be substantiated beyond any reasonable doubt in a court of law.

The post In the section about the identification and significance of physical evidence, the text asserts that simple rules cannot be appeared first on learnedwriters.