Which scenario best demonstrates the Locard's exchange principle, Frye Standard, and Daubert ruling being applied correctly in the order stated?

A. Blood is left at a crime scene, that evidence is then admitted to the court, and finally, the forensic scientist defends the accuracy of the DNA test from that blood evidence in court testimony.

B. Fingerprints are found on the weapon of interest at a crime scene, evidence is admitted to court, and evidence is thrown out because a warrant was not used to collect fingerprints.

C. A witness to a crime scene identifies the weapon in question, brought to court and ruled as reliable by a weapon expert.

D. No evidence is collected at a crime scene because none is found, therefore a judge concludes there is no crime, and the suspect is released.

Locard's exchange principle states that every contact leaves a trace, emphasizing the transfer of materials between individuals and environments. The Frye Standard determines the admissibility of scientific evidence based on its general acceptance within the relevant scientific community. The Daubert ruling establishes criteria to evaluate the reliability and relevance of expert testimony in court.

In the given scenarios, the second example best illustrates the principles in order. The fingerprints found on the weapon align with Locard's exchange principle. However, the evidence is then excluded due to not following proper procedure, adhering to the Frye Standard. Finally, the emphasis on methodology and reliability in court testimony aligns with the Daubert ruling.

Learn more about Forensic Science and Legal Standards here:

https://brainly.com/question/40768927