Functional? perhaps, but I would say that if one peer into history, what one finds is suspects convicted on evidence that would seem flimsy by today's standard,

Functional? perhaps, but I would say that if one peer into history, what one finds is suspects convicted on evidence that would seem flimsy by today's standard, and so will the future look at us. I would think that the number of false positive convictions declines with the advancement of new technology, and that this is perhaps a temporary setback. There was a time before fingerprints and d.n.a. evidence as well, both of which have been very helpful not only in convicting the guilty, but in exonerating the innocent, and if ever come the time that it be feasible and affordable for a layman to plant fake d.n.a. evidence and fingerprints, that would be quite a setback for criminal forensics.