Some DAs, some where in the US must have an undergraduate science degree. Please explain these concepts to the @NDAA president Michael Ramos and NY ADA Melissa Mourges and while at it, to some appellate court Justices in Texas soon to rule on the bitemark aided conviction and upcoming September 2017 execution of Kosoul Chanthakoummane.
It’s just a dental journal (see pg. 68), but this op-ed piece may be the FIRST time organized dentistry has spoken out about the flim-flam of bitemark ‘science.’ The anonymous author is quietly referencing a recent publication from the Journal of Law and the Biosciences titled “Forensic bitemark identification: weak foundations, exaggerated claims.” Use this link to access. The JLB journal is a co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press.
From the Journal of the California Dental Association: (Feb 2017)
It’s Time to Stop Using Bite Marks in Forensics, Experts Argue
Researchers are increasingly skeptical about the validity of bitemark identification as trial evidence, according to a paper published in the Journal of Law and the Biosciences. The paper describes the legal basis for the rise of bite-mark identification and reviews relevant empirical research on the subject…
View original post 264 more words