The criminal justice system is not perfect. Throughout the process, many errors can occur that could result in an innocent person being incarcerated. There are examples of this in the case of Gerald Wayne Davis. Faulty eyewitness testimony and double jeopardy are two of the errors that will be examined in this case. The emphasis is on the use of unreliable scientific evidence. In the past, non-DNA tests were used to prove guilt or innocence. These tests may not be conclusive and can be used to mislead the jury. Today there is DNA testing, a more accurate method of testing, that can prove or disprove a person's connection to a crime. Whether a person has been convicted by a false eyewitness statement or by science, there is a test today that can reverse the injustice suffered by the accused. It is important that these tests are administered before another innocent person dies in prison. On February 18, 1986, Gerald Wayne Davis was accused of raping a family friend while she was at his home doing laundry (Connors, Lundregan, Miller, & McEwen, 1996). The only witnesses to this alleged crime were Gerald Davis, his father, the victim (Connors, 1996). The victim left the defendant's home and went to a friend's house and reported the details of what had happened (State v. Davis, 1988). The friend called the police and the victim was taken to a medical center for examination; she had a cut lip, abrasions on her face and genital area, there was seminal fluid on her panties, and she was missing a shoe and her jacket (State v. Davis, 1988). Based on the victim's account, police went to Davis' home where they found the victim's missing shoe, jacket; they also found sheets, towels and clothing belonging to the defendant which displayed...... middle of paper ......gy. Retrieved November 6, 2011, from USA.gov website: http://www.dna.gov/Innocence project. (nd). Accessed November 6, 2011, from http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Facts_on_PostConviction_DNA_Exonerations.phpLectric Law Library. (2011). Habeas corpus. Retrieved November 28, 2011, from http://www.lectlaw.com/def/h001.htmMaking Jurors the “Experts”: The Case for Jury Instructions for Eyewitness Identification. (2011, March). Boston College Law Review, 52(2), 651-693. Retrieved from EBSCOhostMartin Berry, S. (nd). When experts lie. Retrieved November 6, 2011, from Truthjustice.org website: http://truthjustice.org/expertslie.htmState v. Davis, No. 17915 (West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, December 14, 1988) (LEAGLE). Wiseman, S. (2010, Spring). Innocence after death. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 60(3), 687-750. Taken from EBSCOhost