This is a continuation of our previous blog on blood drops and criminal justice. It is expressly “old school” and experts really heavily on “experiments” both in courtrooms and their ‘spatter” rooms. Calling this science is also present in court testimony. It is nothing of the sort. All the examiners know what results support the aims of their employers and they know what to leave outside the courtroom. That ain’t science, bud.

Taking a close look at “blood spatter” now being called “blood spatter analysis” by its adherents. This article places it in the “bitemark analysis category” of faded glory of forensics.

A “blood examiner” discredited. 

New trial ordered from “misleading” blood expert. 

Peterson decision squeezes Deaver. 

Deaver gets fired.. 

Post conviction appeals focuses on blood guy Deaver.