In a forensic investigation, what is the primary reason for analyzing a suspect's chemical supply list?

To determine the total cost of the chemicals purchased.

To see if they had the specific raw materials needed for a particular chemical reaction.

To check if the suspect was properly licensed to handle dangerous substances.

To identify which chemicals on the list are the most flammable.

An investigator finds that a suspect's supply list includes a strong acid and a potent base, but neither is a known reactant for producing the specific toxic substance found at a crime scene. What is the most logical conclusion?

The suspect is definitely guilty because they possess dangerous chemicals.

The investigator should assume the suspect used a different, unknown chemical reaction.

The supply list does not provide evidence linking the suspect to the production of the specific toxic substance, as the necessary starting materials are absent.

The suspect is likely innocent because the chemicals they have are common in many labs.

Why is possessing the necessary chemicals for a harmful reaction not, by itself, conclusive proof that a person committed a crime?

The chemicals might have been purchased for a legitimate, unrelated purpose.

Chemical supply lists are often inaccurate or forged.

Most dangerous chemicals expire quickly and become harmless.

The chemicals could have been stolen from the suspect.

A forensic chemist is trying to link a suspect to a synthesized poison. What is the crucial connection they must establish between the suspect's chemical supply list and the poison itself?

Proving the suspect purchased the chemicals in cash to avoid a paper trail.

Confirming the supplier who sold the chemicals is a reputable dealer.

Showing that the chemicals on the list are the known reactants that produce the poison as a product.

Demonstrating that the chemicals on the list are more expensive than the poison.

Analyzing Evidence Practice — Grade 7 science