Forensics: How Flawed Science of Bite-Mark Analysis Imprisoned a Man for Murder

A wide open look at the face of junk forensics from 2015. The bitemarkers now claim they are “new and improved.” They certainly will argue that myth at upcoming evidentiary hearings in 2 southern states of the US. It is outrageous that US prosecutors still stoop, in 2021, to such abysmal use of these scientific misanthropes.

Forensic dentists who peddled junk science now admit they were wrong. But will their colleagues — and the courts — listen?
— 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, forensic evidence exaggeration, forensic fraud, Forensic Science, Forensic Science Bias, forensic science misconduct, prosecutorial misconduct 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 )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s