This is a 50 page UBC Law Review narrative on the inadequacies of courts to recognize junk “forensic” experts. Battling Canadian bitemarkers leave a trail of exaggerated claims and criminal case law that is blind to scientific principles.
Forensics: Botched digital measurements led to 11 years in prison. New trial ordered.
DAs expert used a fancy software program to analyze a robbery vid. He botched it. The perp is short. This man is 6’3″. A jailhouse snitch lied during his trial. The DA was mute during all of it.
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/courts/2019/09/12/texas-man-subject-of-netflix-doc-ordered-released-after-11-years-behind-bars/
Forensics: Hearings | Hearings & Legislation | House Committee on Science, Space and Technology
Hearings | Hearings & Legislation | House Committee on Science, Space and Technology
— Read on science.house.gov/hearings/raising-the-bar-progress-and-future-needs-in-forensic-science
Best minds in the business. Mostly female. Quite nice.
Forensics Australia gets low marks from a senior judge
Unreliability of forensic experts gets serious attention from a high level jurist. Some of this started in California’s bitemark case of Bill Richards. @CA_Innocence.
Forensics disaster in the UK. Looking at £s wasted and evidence lost
Take a close look at this one. Government “savings” turned into a mayhem of chaos since the 2012 closure of the FSS. Dont talk to police or politicians abt forensics.
http://www.labnews.co.uk/article/2029976/forensics-in-crisis
http://www.labnews.co.uk/article/2029976/forensics-in-crisis
Posted in AAFS, Bitemarks, Crime lab scandal, criminal justice, CSI, Forensic crime lab security issues, forensic misconuct, Forensic science misconduct, police crime labs, US Crime labs, wrongful convictions
Tagged Bad forensic science, crime labs, Criminal Justice, CSI, Forensic science
Leave a comment
Forensics incorrect between 23% to 96% of court cases
A UK study group describes their study as demanding a “holistic overhaul” of these practices taken into criminal courts. It contains a good review of US exoneration efforts to effect forensics. Too bad the police controlled forensic managers seem deaf to most of this.
https://www.chemistryworld.com/careers/cleaning-up-misinterpreted-forensic-evidence/3010852.article
Forensics: Physics makes important inroads to outdated blood spatter expertise.
This is a well referenced look at BPA. The perspective is clearly science-based and unfettered by practitioner assumptions and biases. Rather refreshing, to put it mildly, and it also uncovers how BPA experts don’t agree with each other on basic spatter evidence.
Forensic experts identifying war and disaster victims
There is not enough funding to do this properly. Volunteers are commonly not reimbursed. Politicians ignore the dead.
https://phys.org/news/2019-08-humanitarian-forensic-scientists-dead-comfort.html
Looking at a Revolution? Getting Forensics Out of Law Enforcement
Many reform ideas in this series of Q&A to forensic and legal experts by the WaPo’s Radley Balko. All are logical and very practical. Prosecutors must be gagging. Here is a quote:
Chris Fabricant, the Innocence Project
Easiest reform:
Eliminate bite mark evidence.
Mid-level reform:
State forensic science commissions, staffed by career scientists, that produce rigorous basic and applied research, and, based on that research, issue mandatory guidelines for the introduction of and the testimonial limitations of all forensic evidence.
If I were dictator:
The same, only at the national level.
More judge-like delusions about error rates in forensics not being necessary.
This time it is in Australia. It does mentions that bitemarks are now outlawed Down Under? Now how did THAT happen? I havent heard a peep abt it.
