Summary and comment: The staid demeanor of most forensic science CSI shows and public conventions has been contradicted  by the explosion of news media coverage of forensics related to Michael Brown’s shooting in Ferguson, MO. Who says forensic scientists always agree? In my personal experience forensic Pundits of all types rise to the surface when the cameras are on. The big Pundits hate it when someone disagrees with them. This occurs even when equivocal or incomplete evidence shows up in a case. Retaliation is not unheard of as an aftermath. Fear of such keeps others quiet.

Added comment: I have not seen anything substantive on the Net/Media about forensic commentators reviewing any of the relevant data released since the Ferguson Gran Jury release. I wonder what’s going on?? I’d think the AAFS would offer itself as a arbiter of what true. Many of the forensic path types involved so far are…