Overview about “Purg(ing) junk science from courtroom” : Effective National Policies Needed

An investigation by the Texas Forensics Commission has determined that using bite-marks on human skin to identify an assailant is junk science and should not be allowed in the courtroom as evidence. Photo: Yellow Dog Productions /Getty Images / 2016

Details into what the Texas Forensic Science Commission is all about. Too bad there are 48 other states without similar legislative produced review boards. The White House needs to become more active in supporting and implementing similar standards. So far the National Forensic Science Commission has produced a languid collection of vocabulary and future “tasks.”

Readers should know that there will be certain prosecutors who will not quietly agree to following the Texas decision to promote a mandate on banning bitemark believers from their cases-in-chief.

The review starts with:

“Texas prosecutors and judges should (italics added) maintain the integrity of the criminal justice system by voluntarily declaring a moratorium on the use of bite-mark evidence in criminal cases as recommended by the Texas Forensic Commission.”


About csidds

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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