Unfounded calculation assumptions in LifeCode DNA testimony: 2016 SC ruling in Simmons

VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED

A telling tale with highlights of the court’s opine on DNA testimony from the commercial DNA lab LifeCodes reveals what forensic malfeasance or misconduct or “puffing results” really means. Lets say that over selling “science” is a huge issue and tremendous challenge to judges doing the “gatekeeping.”

Here’s a typical phrase from the prosecution’s DNA expert that the SC took issue with. She makes a correct statement but misleads the court and defendant’s counsel by omitting its legitimate “lesser weight” relevant to its identification power.

” “What we found was a mixture of DNA which we could not eliminate Kenneth Simmons'[s] blood as being a contributor to.” While a correct statement, this failed to inform the jury that she was basing that opinion on only six of the loci tested. ”

Simmons v SC 2016 faulty DNA

Thanks to Gloria Grening Wolk.

About csidds

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

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