Crim Law: Proposed statutes to counteract use of flawed forensics

Image result for science deniers

  • Statutory triggers to require audits of tainted crime lab evidence
  • Vigorous affirmative efforts to notify clients of the unreliable forensic evidence
  • Meaningful access to discovery including transcripts, lab notes, etc.
  • Allowing DNA testing when samples are available in a case
  • Hearings in which the burden is shifted to the government to prove that the case was not affected by tainted forensic evidence
  • Waiving procedural barriers to appeals

Considering many DAs don’t know a thing about forensic science flim-flam and its experts, Law prof Brandon  Garrett gives us these rules that could “re-set” the system’s inadequate protections for the innocent.

https://forensicsforum.net/2016/12/01/professor-garrett-suggests-potential-ground-rules-to-address-convictions-that-result-from-unreliable-forensic-evidence/

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 )

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