Why does the question of whether something counts as properly "scientific" matter to questions of evidence in criminal law? what are some of the problems with applying criteria that are meant to determine whether something is a science in court cases?

Whether something counts as scientific evidence in criminal law must be taken into careful consideration, since once a proof is established as scientific it becomes an authority argument.

Explanation:

If one considers a piece of evidence as scientific it becomes a strong foundation to validify that line of thought. Even the scientific method can be biased and a misguided approach to a piece of information, statistics or physical evidence can be decisive to the turn out of a court case.

answer; /// the above statement is (true);