Category Archives: expert testimony
Forensics: Junk shoeprint matching and DNA catches up with another famed forensic expert.
This is a continuing story involving Henry Lee and the crime lab where he has been a decades-long teacher and examiner. Added intrigue has to do with a FBI footprint guru teaching how to “definitely” identify a defendant from a … Continue reading
Forensics: DNA contamination personified in this case from Australia.
In the US, prosecutors in San Diego investigated the lab worker whose DNA was mixed up in the crime scene samples. He later committed suicide. This case in AU has similar DNA problems. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-28/more-dna-contamination-claims-emerge-at-claremont-trial/12011756
Forensics: A DC judge calls out police junk forensics – then limits expert ballistic evidence.
A rare look into a judge doing his job by using scientific principles to reject decades-long use of exaggerated bullet matching assumptions. Good summation of issues by Radley Balko at WaPo. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/02/28/dc-judge-issues-much-needed-opinion-junk-science/
Forensics: A “cavalier”and long-time shaken baby expert will not admit his decades of misdiagnoses.
Dr. Steiner’s “Saving the kids” mantra was later adopted by the bitemarkers. https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/investigations/3news-investigates-science-behind-shaken-baby-cases-under-attack/95-049076b8-261c-41d7-87b2-a631864b2e6f
Forensics: Canadian look at bias in expert testimony
An appellate judge says distorted expert testimony can “swallow the entire judicial process.” https://www.lakecountrycalendar.com/columns/kootnekoff-problematic-experts-in-legal-proceedings/
Posted in AAFS, ABFO, Bite Marks, CSI, expert testimony, Forensic Science, Forensic Science Bias
Leave a comment
Forensics: Perjury by a Prosecution expert #AAFS2020
Not all experts tell the truth. Good read for forensic students. https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/02/daniel-j-wright-perjury-by/
Forensics: Psych tests mostly junk says NRC
Psych experts have free reign in deciding courtroom outcomes in civil and criminal cases. Only 3% get their unregulated opinions are scrutinized during trial. https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/02/16/science/ap-us-sci-psychology-tests.html https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/02/16/science/ap-us-sci-psychology-tests.html
Forensics: A nurse practitioner and a MD. Another horror story from the bruise pattern experts.
This comes out of Milwaukee WI. Two married docs. Adopting a baby. A visit to the ER. Then the Inquisition started. Falsified records, a bitemarker-like MD who lectures about “saving the children,” inept child abuse advocates, and a reporter who … Continue reading
Forensics: A good look at non-science advocacy masquerading as forensics. SBS
Remember, watch your back when you go against the grain of “established” medical opinion. The “true believers” will come after you. https://theappeal.org/new-jersey-woman-prison-shaken-baby-syndrome/
#Forensics: Unreliable experts in Australia unfortunately sound all too familiar.
Very good look at how lack of proper legal rules let the bitemarkers and other court experts run rampant. Of course those who attended a recent @NIST forensics symposium were insulted by the scientists who reached the same conclusions. https://www.gq.com.au/entertainment/tech/evidence-on-trial-why-the-forensic-evidence-is-less-reliable-than-we-think/news-story/27c34297d86970ec5867da91b0f6729e
