Future blog will show foto evidence from 48 bitemark cases .
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…
View original post 17 more words