Ian Baxter
Current Event 6 Review
The
importance of thorough forensic examinations is underestimated, as they can
have a major impact on the outcome of a crime or accident. In this article,
author Varinder Bhatia proved the importance of thorough forensic examinations,
in his shrewd analysis of a horrid crime scene in India. One man’s wife and
children were burned alive, and only his wife is still fighting for her life in
a local hospital. The man alleged that the attack was by upper caste Rajputs,
and claimed that eleven men set his house on fire from the outside. However,
after thorough forensic analysis, Haryana forensic experts determined that the
fire was started from the inside of the building, not the outside. The forensic
experts also proved numerous other claims wrong, showing, for example, that
there were no traces of outside entry. However, the most important claim may be
one that the eleven men accused in this horrific crime scaled the walls of the
house in order to attack the man (Jitender), and his wife and two children.
Forensic pointed out that there were plants next to the wall, and had the men
scaled them before breaking in, there would have been a disturbance, and there
was no such disturbance witnessed. While Jitender’s claims seem shaky at best,
seven of the eleven men accused in the crime have been arrested.
This
article describing this very disturbing crime is so significant because it
expresses the importance of thorough forensic analysis. One cannot solely rely
on the claims of a victim or perpetrator involved in a crime to determine the
truth about what happened, but thorough forensic analysis can ultimately find
either truth or fiction to all claims in a crime. It is very tragic to hear
about the family’s loss, and I read with sheer disgust at any perpetrator’s who
would commit such a horrid crime, but the article more so stressed the
importance of forensic analysis. Today, forensic analysis can help prove the
innocence or guilt of a perpetrator, can help justice to be served, and can put
all questions to rest about what happened in a crime. It is very important that
shrewd forensic analysis takes place in any crime being observed.
I
definitely thought that the article could have been written a little bit better.
While there probably was not much time to actually write the article given the
circumstances and updates of the crime, it definitely could have been organized
a lot better. As a reader, it was confusing to have so many allegations
discussed here and there and forensic experts’ final verdicts on these claims everywhere.
I think that had the article been more organized, with an opening paragraph
describing the horrific crime, and then another paragraph describing the
allegations, it would have been a much easier to follow read.
Bhatia, Varinder. "Faridabad: Fire That
Killed Dalit Kids Started in Room, Not Outside, Say Forensic Experts." The
Indian Express. N.p., 30 Oct. 2015. Web. 01 Nov. 2015.
6 comments:
This review did a good job at explaining the situation in which he was talking about in a clear way. The review also did a good job in showing how the man’s claims were proven wrong by stating the argument counter to the claim that the eleven man scaled the wall. Also, the review made it clear what importance thorough analysis of a crime scene has and how it can determine what accusations are made when accessing a crime. The review was written very clearly and in an organized manner so it was easy to follow along the main points that were being made about thorough forensic analysis.
I would have liked to have known more about the outcome of the situation of the crime scene and the house fire. I feel as though the review left the reader hanging about what was further concluded about the crime and could have added more information about what other conclusions were made about the house fire. I also would have liked to know specifically what makes a crime scene analysis thorough and how Forensic Scientists make sure they aren’t missing any key pieces of evidence. This would have made the basis for the review’s argument stronger.
I was very surprised at the terrible crime that the review was centered around and I am interested to know what further happens with the outcome of that case. The terrible crime committed is something that was shocking to hear about because of how terrible its consequences were.
I believe that Ian did a great job on expressing why thorough Forensic Examinations are so important in a crime scene. Another thing Ian succeeded in was explaining how thorough Forensic Examinations can heavily change the outcome of a case. And last but not least another accomplishment made by Ian was his great description on what the article lacked and how he gave precise examples on how it could've been better.
Although Ian did do a great job on this article, I thought that when he was describing the case that the article was covering, he could've gave more details on the case itself. And the last thing that the review could've used, was a case that we could relate to with our current studies in Forensics. At least for, this would've helped me understand and even relate more to the review and the article itself.
I think everybody like me definitely learned the importance of thorough Forensic Examinations and how they can be the decider in somebody being guilty or innocent in a case
Ian's review of the article on in depth forensic analysis was very straightforward in explaining the situation and how forensic analysis helped proved 11 men innocent saving them from a punishment they didn't deserve. The review was written well and was easy to understand - it does a good job at explaining why forensic analysis is so important when investigating a crime scene. It would've been helpful to add a tad bit more detail to better understand the story since there seemed to be a few holes in the information given, one example being how did the family get trapped in the home? why didn't they leave when they realised their home was burning? if the community was close enough to notice one man climbing a wall, why didn't anyone notice a house was on fire? was it day or night? It's these details that help the reader better grasp the situation.
I thought Ian Baxter’s review of the article “Faridabad: Fire that killed dalit kids started in Room, Not outside, Say Forensic Experts” by the Indian Express was really interesting. I agreed when he said that forensic examinations can impact the outcome of a crime investigation. He talks about the importance of forensic examinations. One thing he did well was talk about the story of a man’s wife and his children that were burned alive, but his wife was fighting for her life in the hospital. He goes on to describe how in the case, there were many claims that were proven incorrect through forensic examination. He talks about how the fire “supposedly” started outside, but it was actually started inside. Another thing he did well was state the claims that the forensic experts had found through examination which changed many things within the case. I also think that another thing Ian had done well was that he gave his opinion on the article and how he thought it was disturbing to read. Even though he did many things well, I thought that there were some details that could have improvement. One improvement he could have made was described how the forensic evidence had made it possible for the crime to be completely solved because he talked about the case, but not how the investigators fixed their errors that was made in the first place. Another thing I think he could have improved would be that there are details that were missed out in his review that was needed to understand the case. I think his article pulled me in and grabbed my attention.
Overall, Ian did a very nice job of summarizing the content of the article. I especially liked how he began his review with a very general statement that grabbed the reader’s attention. After reading the opening line, the reader already has an idea about what the theme of the article is, but is also intrigued to continue reading to see how that idea connects to a specific event. Ian was also able to organize his thoughts very clearly; I found his summary of the article to be very clear and concise. Furthermore, he did a good job of presenting the crime, identifying the problems within solving that crime, and then connecting it to the world in general. In Ian’s review, it is clear that he became very comfortable with the article in order to provide his audience with a detailed description of the article’s content. His use of proper grammar also allows for good flow while reading the review.
I would have liked if Ian had interpreted a direct quote from the text to add more detail to his summary. The review is a bit broad, but I cannot argue with the fact that he got the point across to his audience. I also wished that Ian elaborated on why only seven of the eleven men accused have been arrested; I found it confusing that the husband’s accusations have all been proven incorrect but they decided to arrest the seven men anyways.
I definitely agree that forensic science can not be underestimated, because it plays a huge role in finding the truth behind a crime. I think it would be very interesting to follow this investigation and see what forensic analysis determines next for it. I think it is cool that Ian chose to review an article about a very recent case because if we do choose to follow the investigation on our own, we will be able to see how the evidence has evolved to serve justice.
Bhatia, Varinder. "Faridabad: Fire That Killed Dalit Kids Started in Room, Not Outside, Say Forensic Experts." The Indian Express., 30 Oct. 2015. Web. 01 Nov. 2015.
I like how you selected an article which followed a specific case. The inclusion of the drama of the crime made the article a more interesting read. You did a great job of proving how thorough investigation can lead to the truth in a crime by providing examples; the fire starting inside rather than outside, the inability of the men to scale the walls, etc. I like how you presented your issues with the article, and then provided a solution as to how the article could have been written differently to solve those problems.
Most of the sentences in your review were run-ons and therefore hard to follow. The content was there, but taking a second read for grammatical issues would have made the piece more tangible to the reader. I think you may have over-killed the use of ‘thorough forensic analysis.’ You did an excellent job of proving it, but had you taken it to something beyond that your review would have been all the more stronger.
Your article really touched on point we went over during class in the beginning of the year. It really made me circle back to all the things we learned in the beginning, great choice!
Post a Comment