Forensics: Brandon Garrett. How Do Lawyers and Jurors Perceive Forensic Evidence? | Psychology Today

Assessing lawyers vs laypeople about forensic reliability. Bitemarks being as good as fingerprints began with Ted Bundy in 1978. Bitemarkers still argue they have “science” in their favor. Real scientists say “WTF?” Criminal courts still have Bundy, Marx (a CA case from 1975) and their progeny as precedent.

Is there a reverse-CSI effect in our courtrooms? What do lawyers and jurors think of evidence like fingerprint and DNA evidence?
— Read on www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/law-and-psychology/202103/how-do-lawyers-and-jurors-perceive-forensic-evidence

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, Forensic Science, junk forensic science and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

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