Forensics non-science: The danger of relying on a single piece of evidence – great overview on expert exaggeration in police crime labs.

From Africa. An excellent look. The author mentions bitemarks and a list of other misleading forensic opinions. Courts have problems with weak standards and poor understanding of robust scientific methods. Mentions the 2009 NAS Report which some crime labbers and bitemark dentists ridiculed. The NAS did quote some of my work with Profs Michael Saks and David Faigman in their popular Modern Scientific Evidence series.

Is the evidence used to convict criminals always based on sufficient facts or data? Leletu Tonisi from the Wits Justice Project examines some of the flaws in the system
— Read on

About csidds

Dr. Michael Bowers is a long time forensic consultant in the US and international court systems.
This entry was posted in AAFS, ABFO, Bad Forensic Science, Bite Marks, Bitemarks, costs of wrongful convictions, criminal justice reform, CSI, DNA profiling, forensic evidence exaggeration, Forensic Science, Forensic Science Bias, forensic science misconduct, Medical errors, wrongful convictions and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your 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