Don’t mistake the technique for its content.

A clear opine on bitemark IDs as “sexy evidence.”

Eye of the beholder

You know the adage, “Don’t miss the forest for the trees”? Analogous to bitemark “experts” with their advanced software and photo enhancement technology claiming it’s “science”. The testimony of the seeming bitemark “expert” is their ability to put on a virtual media production, designed to sway the jury.

My friend, an honorable judge, understands instantly, the power of what he phrased, “sexy evidence” in its ability to hold sway over a jury.

I wish to remind my readership, that my opinion is in stark contrast to that of the majority of my peers in the field of Forensic Odontology. I contend that pattern injury analysis, such as it is known today in bitemark work, is highly unscientific. Juries do not give a flying leap about your confidence level in rendering your opinion.

They don’t care to what degree of “reasonable medical certainty” you ascribe to your opinion. You have invited…

View original post 71 more words

About csidds

Dr. Michael Bowers is a long time forensic consultant in the US and international court systems.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s