Another mini-review of bitemark matching fallacies that present in the US courts since 1954 and which contributed to dozens wrongful convictions. That number continues to increase. This article focuses on Alfred Swinton’s recent release from a Connecticut prison. It does not discuss that Alfred has to sue the state, the dentists,, the police, (DAs are immune) and other investigators in order to receive any compensation for the 18 years he spent locked up.
Besides better judge “gate-keeping, ” this next article says “bitemarks are sometimes” wrong.
This reporter misses the point that proving when bitemarks are “right” has never been studied by the bitemarkers. That doesn’t deter the dentists, however.
One bitemark big wig has this to say,
“There are hundreds and hundreds of other cases that have been tried in this country in which bite-mark evidence has led to an accurate conclusion,” said Golden. “While the Innocence Project may ignore that, the fact still remains there is a place for bite-mark evidence in the realm of forensic investigation.”
This amounts to more “psuedo-science” bunko from this small bunch who can’t even construct successful proficiency testing, let alone perform positive validity testing for their obsolete litany of “scientific assumptions.”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/10/bite-mark-evidence-sometimes-wrong/5372523/
