Bitemark Forensic Science: who is at fault for 25 cases of bad results?

The backbiting (pun intended) response by the ABFO (a forensic bite mark board recognized by the AAFS) leadership against its own membership (N=108) involved in the 24 cases of erroneous convictions and incarcerations leads everyone to wonder “who are they?”  What justifies ABFO claims that the “correct methods” and a “non-biased” examiner will guarantee a medically certain outcome?  Blame somebody else seems be their public strategy.

Most of this forensic drama was described in a previous @csidds blog.

In response to recent court cases in Ohio and NYC, the Innocence Project Strategic Litigation Director Chris Fabricant, compiled and submitted to courts and the public domain  the attached fact list.  It comes with citations and references regarding the dentist participants in these cases of erroneous bite mark outcomes.

Most of the participants held AAFS + ABFO membership at the time of the original trial testimony. Four are past ABFO presidents and two are past presidents of the AAFS.

Description of Bite Mark Exonerations and Arrests

About csidds

Dr. Michael Bowers is a long time forensic consultant in the US and international court systems.
This entry was posted in Bite Marks, criminal justice, CSI, expert testimony, Forensic Science and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Bitemark Forensic Science: who is at fault for 25 cases of bad results?

  1. csidds says:

    Reblogged this on CSI DDS and commented:

    Future blog will show foto evidence from 48 bitemark cases .

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s