CSIDDS JUST ARRIVED AT 7,000 VIEWS. THANKS FOR FOLLOWING!
There are some who think that only DNA testing after criminal convictions can generate an exoneration. Well, that is not exactly true. The FBI has admitted that their decades long use of comparing hair characteristics was faulty. The aftermath to this is threefold: 1) lack of relevant testing within some police sciences and bitemark identification is initiating a slow but assuredly steady march towards standards and limits of use for certain forensic sciences. 2) the public is watching, 3) review of cases of misuse and faulty forensic assumptions are being vigorously reviewed by very dedicated Innocence Projects and similar advocacy groups.
The author Martin Yant describes a case where hair and DNA collided and DNA won again. He suggests that some just consider cases like these as outliers or the “bad apple effect.” Ive heard that before. BITEMARK BAD APPLES.
* CBI lost piece of evidence in Aurora theater shooting trial
* How dental records will help identify bodies from MH17 –
* Remains identified by teeth as teen who disappeared in 2005