A story told from a juror’s perspective. How police experts doctor their error rates in “proficiency” tests. Ballistics and fingerprints linked to misleading testimony as revealed by Itiel Dror at UCL. Bitemarkers did similar.
Don’t believe forensic examiners’ claims about their accuracy.
— Read on slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/12/forensic-science-accuracy-firearm-fingerprint-comparisons.html
Dr. Michael Bowers is a long time forensic consultant in the US and international court systems.
This entry was posted in AAFS
, costs of wrongful convictions
, criminal justice reform
, forensic evidence exaggeration
, forensic fraud
, Forensic Science
, forensic science misconduct
, forensic science reform
, junk forensic science
and tagged police forensic proficiency testing fraud
. Bookmark the permalink