Democracy Forward and the Union of Concerned Scientists say the Trump-era statement is biased, inaccurate, and runs afoul of federal law.
— Read on theintercept.com/2021/08/08/forensic-science-reform-justice-department/
Latest News on Forensic Science and Criminal Law
-
Join 1,258 other subscribers
Some feature matching disciplines are very subjective and others are not. I think PCAST made an error by lumping them all together. Bitemarks are bullshit. Firearms identification done correctly is not. Cartridge case identification not so much. Fingerprint ID is mostly reliable depending on the quality of the latent print may or may not be reliable, but usually, it is. The main question I have is “why do we let non-scientists (judges) decide what is good science and what is not?”
Right. The legal system still uses Frye from 1923 and misuses Daubert quite often. No wonder the junk still gets into court.