This is an addition to yesterday’s CSIDDS post……
This new post [ taken from David Averill’s 2012 publication “A response to a critic of the bitemark critics.” ] takes you to the source of the Bitemarker Nation.
Be ready to travel to a very unprofessional place.
The author of the website http://www.bitemark.org posted an article regarding the admissibility of bitemark evidence in several cases in Texas, and spent some time discussing the supposedly ‘asinine’ nature of applying experimental scientific methodology to forensic science. The article makes the point that the scientific method should not apply to some disciplines, as they are not ‘hard’ sciences, like physics and chemistry. This commentary represents an example of why critics of forensic science find these disciplines particularly frustrating, in that they attempt to justify their forensic practice on the basis that they are somehow ‘different’ or ‘immune’ to good scientific practice. But there is no logical reason why forensic science and the scientific method should be mutually exclusive….. Read more by clicking on the PDF below
Open PDF by clicking a-response-to-a-critic-of-the-critics-2 Written by Mark Page BDS, PhD