Category Archives: junk forensic science

Forensics: Another expert with 40 hours of training recants his own testimony

.https://www.propublica.org/article/blood-spatter-expert-robert-thorman-joe-bryan-case/amp?__twitter_impression=true Blood-Spatter Expert in Joe Bryan Case Says “My Conclusions Were Wrong” The expert whose testimony was key to Bryan’s conviction for his wife’s 1985 murder says he now believes that some of his techniques were incorrect. His admission comes … Continue reading

Posted in criminal justice reform, CSI, junk forensic science, Wrongful Conviction | Leave a comment

Forensics: Fire-science getting the cold shoulder again in Texas

Lentini memo on arson science. John Lentini’s narrative about TX bureaucrats pulling back from scientific advances in arson investigation produced after Todd Willingham’s execution based on flawed forensics.

Posted in Bad Forensic Science, Forensic Science, forensic science reform protecting the innocent, junk forensic science | Tagged | Leave a comment

Forensics: “Dentists should own identifying disaster victims from bitemarks”

Although written with the best of intentions, this journal article is a hot mess. The author mixes dental identification of human remains with “the teeth don’t lie” metaphor used by bitemarkers. This will surely get put on the bitemark reading … Continue reading

Posted in ABFO, Bite Marks, Bitemarks, junk forensic science, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Forensics: Want a BS excuse for “bad forensics”? Blame it on “bad apples.”

This is truly ridiculous counterpoint to forensic science reform, but the forensic industry and its associated prosecutors take it as gospel. The medical profession used claims of “perfection” in the 18th century when they used to bleed patients to death … Continue reading

Posted in Bitemarks, Crime lab scandal, criminal justice, criminal justice reform, junk forensic science | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Forensics Canada: Bitemarkers run amok; Courts and DAs prefer case precedence over science.

This is a 50 page UBC Law Review narrative on the inadequacies of courts to recognize junk “forensic” experts. Battling Canadian bitemarkers leave a trail of exaggerated claims and criminal case law that is blind to scientific principles. SSRN-id3201061   … Continue reading

Posted in ABFO, Bad Forensic Science, Bite Marks, Bitemarks, expert testimony, Forensic Science, Forensic Science Bias, junk forensic science, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Forensic tap-dancing at its best

https://www.ocweekly.com/crime-lab-director-says-too-busy-to-search-for-forensic-science-errors/ Crime Lab Director Says Too Busy to Search for Forensic Science Errors R. Scott MoxleyJuly 11, 2018 Illustration by Bill Hunt Bruce Houlihan enjoys puzzles, but the Orange County Crime Lab director is purposely failing to solve one of … Continue reading

Posted in forensic misconuct, Forensic Science, Forensic Science Bias, junk forensic science | Leave a comment

More judges and DAs bail on opportunity to exclude bitemarkers “identification” bogus opinions.

Who ever said science and law have a common ground of knowledge? Not in this case and others still pending with lawyers arguing guilt is proven by practitioners of their unsubstantiated offerings of “medical certainty.”   https://www.altoonamirror.com/news/local-news/2018/05/ross-bite-mark-appeal-rejected/

Posted in AAFS, ABFO, Bad Forensic Science, Bitemarks, junk forensic science, Wrongful Conviction | Leave a comment

Chris Fabricant of the IP talks about judges avoiding science in the courtroom

“At some point, we have to acknowledge that precedent has to be overruled by scientific reality.” Some of that science — analysis of bite marks, latent fingerprints, firearms identification, burn patterns in arson investigations, footwear patterns and tire treads — … Continue reading

Posted in forensic science reform, forensic science reform protecting the innocent, junk forensic science, Ray Krone bitemark case | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Junk Online Journals Abound on the Internet – Predatory Intent

Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers This list published by ‘Jeffrey Beale‘ is endless. Every year he publishes it gets longer. Incredible. It goes on for pages and pages. https://web.archive.org/web/20170103170850/https://scholarlyoa.com/publishers

Posted in junk forensic science | Tagged | 1 Comment

Another bitemark conviction vacated due to DNA and dentist recant. 

The number of bm aided cases overturned by DNA approaching 30 in the US.

Posted in Bite Marks, Bitemarks, Crime lab scandal, DNA profiling, exoneration, forensic science reform protecting the innocent, junk forensic science | Leave a comment