Forensics Canada: Bitemarkers run amok; Courts and DAs prefer case precedence over science.

887a2-snakeoil

This is a 50 page UBC Law Review narrative on the inadequacies of courts to recognize junk “forensic” experts. Battling Canadian bitemarkers leave a trail of exaggerated claims and criminal case law that is blind to scientific principles.

SSRN-id3201061

 

 

About csidds

Dr. Michael Bowers is a long time forensic consultant in the US and international court systems.
This entry was posted in ABFO, Bad Forensic Science, Bite Marks, Bitemarks, expert testimony, Forensic Science, Forensic Science Bias, junk forensic science, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Forensics Canada: Bitemarkers run amok; Courts and DAs prefer case precedence over science.

  1. What is it about “the whole truth” that these quasi-forensic experts”, i.e.“forensic odontologists” have failed to understand? They damn well know the limitations of any claim they are making regarding the putative value of purported bite marks admitted into evidence . These guys have no standards. I am ashamed of colleagues who “overstate” the value of bitemark evidence. It is simply not the truth.

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

Connecting to %s