My physical evidence class had a field trip to the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension for a presentation on arson.
The presentation was punishingly boring. The forensic scientist did not tailor his presentation to his audience, so we got a science lecture. I did not understand a third of the words, and the expert’s charts were incomprehensible.
And of course certain gunners students asked questions.
Lots of questions.
One of my classmates asked over 10 questions, about the science lecture. I’m not one to hate on the intellectual curiosity of others. Good for them.
But it was ridiculous.
I asked one question: “How does your forensic work come into play during trial?”
The scientist balked at the question, said he was getting to it, and then did not give a straight answer when another student re-asked that question at the end of his presentation.
Fail.
After the presentation we got a tour of the bureau. Here are some pictures!
4 Comments
Laura
July 8, 2010 at 9:34 pmDon’t harsh on the science. I love the science!
Jansen
July 8, 2010 at 10:45 pmBut you wouldn’t lecture a class of law students like you would a classroom of scientists 😉
Fridays From the Frontline « Clear Admit: Law School Admissions Blog
July 16, 2010 at 7:22 am[…] exam desperation. Minnesota ’11 Jansen went on a field trip with his Physical Evidence class to the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. 3L Law School Ninja reminded soon-to-be 1Ls that their legal reputation starts with […]
Forensic Scientist
September 30, 2010 at 6:51 pmI just happened to stumble across this blog doing a different google search. Simple answer. He was a scientist, not a lawyer. Maybe you should stick to the books and skip the tours because in court, someday, it might help you out to know some of those words. Just my opinion.
-scientist.