This is what I found when I gathered the information for this question:
Scientists studying evidence should not be given any information about the case, or those accused of the crime, because their scientific findings could be influenced as a result.
At The Innocence Project, an article stated that some scientists given background information before studying evidence made mistakes in identifying fingerprints. This seems simple enough, but scientists are human, and any information could adversely affect their findings.
The bottom line is that the evidence needs to speak for itself.
Scientists studying evidence should not be given any information about the case, or those accused of the crime, because their scientific findings could be influenced as a result.
At The Innocence Project, an article stated that some scientists given background information before studying evidence made mistakes in identifying fingerprints. This seems simple enough, but scientists are human, and any information could adversely affect their findings.
The bottom line is that the evidence needs to speak for itself.