FORENSICS: Time to Look Back 5 years. Scientific Status and NRC (NAS) Comments in “Identification from Bitemarks”

Nothing can more chilling than what is going on in forensics over the last 5 years.   Certain national forensic organizations have and are still being investigated by US federal, Congressional or executive agencies or committees.

Certain forensic disciplines are no different. Interestingly, some groups step up to the plate and become proactive and participate in public discussions (as in the National Commission on Forensic Science), while others deny faults and object or become mute or nasty.

I’ve been getting nasty looks and comments for years from the pro-bitemark ID groups around the world. It seems to all have begun in 1999 when I was asked to co-author a chapter called  “Identification from Bitemarks.’ This chapter is  in a series of volumes published by West (law) Publishing Inc. It is still being updated and available. The total compendium is called “Modern Scientific Evidence: The Law and Science of Expert Testimony.” Both were a mainstay reference of the 2009 NRC (NAS) report.

This link MSE_Ch_37_Bitemarks will allow the reader to a previous iteration of Ch 37 “Identification from Bitemarks.” Hot topics include:

Legal Issues.

37:7 erroneous identification and convictions

Scientific Issues. 

37.11: NRC (NAS) Report on Odontology.

37:12: Scientific status and proficiency testing.

37:13: Error rates.

37E: National Research Counsel Comments.








About csidds

Dr. Michael Bowers is a long time forensic consultant in the US and international court systems.
This entry was posted in AAFS, Bitemarks, criminal justice and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

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