Forensic Scientist

Forensic Scientist

LIsa Black

Cape Coral, FL

Female, 49

I spent the five happiest years of my life in a morgue. As a forensic scientist in the Cleveland coroner’s office I analyzed gunshot residue on hands and clothing, hairs, fibers, paint, glass, DNA, blood and many other forms of trace evidence, as well as crime scenes. Now I'm a certified latent print examiner and CSI for a police department in Florida. I also write a series of forensic suspense novels, turning the day job into fiction. My books have been translated into six languages.

SubscribeGet emails when new questions are answered. Ask Me Anything!Show Bio +

Share:

Ask me anything!

Submit Your Question

989 Questions

Share:

Last Answer on July 21, 2022

Best Rated

Which is better to be forensic scientist, forensic science in the middle and low university or biology in the good university?

Asked by Kim over 6 years ago

It may depend on what you want to do. If you want to work crime scene, then you might be a more attractive candidate with all the hands-on practical work of a forensic science degree. But if you want to be a DNA analyst, then I’d go with biology. Best thing to do is call the labs where you might someday apply and ask them. Best of luck!

HI! Did you ever regret pursuing your job? Also, can you be both, a forensic scientist and a CSI?

Asked by Fenis over 5 years ago

No, I've never regretted it. And your job title is whatever your agency says it is, so 'forensic scientist' and 'csi' can mean different things in different agencies, so you can certainly be both. the first implies you work mostly in the lab and the second implies you work mostly in the field, but depending on the size of the agency and any specialization you have, you might do both equally or they might be completely separate.

Can you visit and read this and possibly help me?

https://ogburn.brainhoney.com/Frame/Component/CoursePlayer?enrollmentid=95998597

Asked by Al almost 7 years ago

Sorry, the link just took me to the sign-in page.

Do you think physical evidence has increased in importance over the last several decades, with advancements in technology and testing procedures? Why or why not?

Asked by Ar almost 7 years ago

Physical evidence was always extremely important. What has changed with technology is what types of evidence are more commonly examined. It used to be hairs and pollen and now it's touch DNA and cell phones.

Why did you want to be in the criminology department?

Asked by jasmine nunez over 6 years ago

If you have a list of homework questions, please email me at: Lisa-black@live.com

Where you ever shocked by a crime scene?

Asked by Denise_ot5 over 6 years ago

They’re all shocking, in their way, But there hasn’t been one in particular that bowled me over.

I bought a pair of buckskin-colored work gloves and just after one day of warring the gloves for work I put them away. Twenty years later would my DNA still be detected from inside of the pair of gloves

Asked by Hank Saxena about 6 years ago

Possibly, I suppose. If they were swabbed thoroughly and the swabs picked up a few skin cells, then it would be within the realm of possibility.