Forensics: OMG. Ballistics ID refused. A D.C. judge’s much-needed opinion on ‘junk science’ – The Washington Post

Posted on November 11, 2020 by csidds

Ballistic IDs got seriously limited in this one. Judge says “no expert opinion without science to back it up.” You know, stuff abt accuracy and error rates. DAs and USDOJers say all is still good with police forensics. Not. Much praise for the judge.

Opinion | A D.C. judge’s much-needed opinion on ‘junk science’ – The Washington Post
— Read on www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/02/28/dc-judge-issues-much-needed-opinion-junk-science/?outputType=amp

Unknown's avatar

About csidds

Dr. Michael Bowers is a long time forensic consultant in the US and international court systems.
This entry was posted in AAFS, Bad Forensic Science, Bitemarks, criminal justice reform, CSI, expert testimony, forensic evidence exaggeration, Forensic Science Bias, junk forensic science, police crime labs, US Crime labs and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a comment