1381 pages.
Latest News on Forensic Science and Criminal Law
-
Join 223 other subscribers
#AAFS2017 Rules of Civility for all at NOLA – “SPIT not in the Fire,” etc
For the American Academy of Forensic Science conventioneers. There’s 92 more of these from a 1888 reprint of George Washington’s copy of Rules of Civility & Decent Behaviour in Company and Conversation (starts on pg. 13). Updated for modernity and relevance.
“The thoughtful reader will recognize in this rule the germ and spirit of all rules of civility and the universal key to good behavior.”
1st~EVERY Action done in Company, ought to be with Some Sign of Respect, to those that are Present {Except those who profess to be scientists without proffer of data}
2d~When in Company, put not your Hands to any Part of the Body, not usualy Discovered {…hmm, that would exclude some at the Wine and Cheese gatherings}.
3d~ Shew Nothing to your Friend that may affright him. {Do not mention #45 during the meeting}.
4th~ In the Presence of Others sing not to yourself with a humming Noise, nor Drum, with your Fingers or Feet. {Do not affect obsequiousness in the presence of your betters}.
5th~ IF YOU Cough, Sneeze, Sigh, or Yawn, do it not Loud, but Privately; and Speak not your Yawning, but put Your handkerchief or Hand before your face and turn aside. {Tweet quietly; set mobiles to ‘vibrate’}.
6th~ SLEEP not when others Speak, Sit not when others stand, Speak not when yoU Should hold your Peace, walk not on when others Stop. {Do not gaggle in the hallways around those mentioned in 4th Rule}.
7th~ PUT not off your Cloths in the presence of Others, nor go out your Chamber half Drest. {Unlikely considering the expected weather problems during Mardi Gras this year}.
8th~ AT PLAY and at Fire its Good manners to give Place to the last Commer, and affect not to Speak Louder than ordenary. {Some senior AAFSers come late and are hard of hearing}.
9th~ SPIT not in the Fire, nor Stoop low before it neither Put your Hands into the Flames to warm them, nor Set your Feet upon the Fire especially if there be meat before it. {I’ve seen this at Morton’s Steak House a few times}.
Fighting “unique” toolmark testimony with science and an amicus brief
Much like bitemark “identification”
“In this case, a toolmark “expert” testified against James Genrich by assuring the jury that several of Genrich’s tools made purportedly unique marks on fragments of the bombs recovered from the crime scene, “to the exclusion of any other tool” in the world. That testimony all but assured Genrich’s conviction. But as this brief describes, the scientific community has now recognized that it is not a forensic discipline. “The reality is that uniqueness is impossible to prove, and is not anywhere near as relevant as some may claim[.]”2”
Read the entire brief filed in The People of the State of Colorado v. James Genrich
A new version of “fake expert” comes out of new WH advisory group.
According to ‘Rawstory,’ it’s lies, lies and how to make a living.
To be fair, I’ve never heard of this guy. But looking at the information available at this time, he shows some extraordinary expertise from little to no credentials.
Its not uncommon for the self-“certified” or “self-qualified” to call themselves experts. They sell themselves out as knowledgeable consults and will scam those who fail to properly vette them.
In this case, its No. 45’s White House that could have been scammed.
From the Forensic Regulator – Code of Ethics and Standards – #AAFS2017
“My aim is that all forensic science provided to the CJS is of the required level of quality; the quality standards are set out in detail in these Codes.” Dr. Gillian Tully, the UK Forensic Regulator.
Notable in this extensive document is the inclusiveness of most crime lab and adjunct ‘identification’ trades from digital evidence to podiatry. The dentists are left out, of course. Maybe they can join up with the Anthros.
Herein is the rub for some of these groups in that this aspect of “conduct” is expected to be implemented immediately: validation and “risks.” We don’t read on this sie of the Atlantic about that in the proposals for forensic standards or publicity ads regarding “forensic breakthroughs.”
20.6. The [validation] acceptance criteria
20.6.1. The acceptance criteria should be clearly stated, based upon the specification, the risk analysis and any control strategies put in place to control identified risks.
20.6.2. The acceptance criteria shall be used to demonstrate the effectiveness of the method and control strategy within measurable and set tolerances.
20.7. The validation plan 20.7.1.
The validation shall be carried out according to a documented validation plan. The validation plan shall identify and define the functional and performance requirements, the relevant parameters and characteristics to be studied and the acceptance criteria for the results obtained to confirm that the specified requirements for the method, product or service have been met.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/forensic-science-providers-codes-of-practice-and-conduct-2016 (2016 1.2MB 58pages)
Rules to follow about how to write/know what is a scientific paper – #AAFS2017
For those beginning in forensics or merely interesting in some insights to ‘scientific’ literature, this should be where you start. I would suggest you actually write these rules down as a handy reference.
Some value points:
- Determine the differences between proofs versus ‘feelings.’
- How to read a professional journal which deals with ‘new’ science or validation of findings from previous researchers. Unfortunately this is rather rare in the scientific lexicon other than in medicine. Forensic DNA excels because of this replication step.
- Learn how to ‘look things up’ to decifer unfamiliar language or methods. (Do NOT use Wkipedia). This generally takes some digging, but that’s how information becomes knowledge. Its worth the effort and gets easier with experience.
Know Your Rights: LinkedIn Access to scientists attending the #AAFS mtg in NOLA
This is for those traveling to New Orleans for the upcoming AAFS 2017 convention. Please pass this on to our international colleagues. Know what to say and what to do when CBP interviews “foreign” nationals at ports of entry.
Making Sense of DNA Genetics – #AAFS2017 – Epigenetics is mentioned
This is a primer-level (being in a brochure format) look on the subject and has some gaps as far as interpretation of DNA partial profiles and mixtures but admits that, even with algorithmic software, there still is human interpretation in any ‘match.’
On page 15 of the .pdf, bitemarks are chastised as being a forensic ‘science’ that has no agreement amongst its ‘experts.’ Tell that to the American Academy of Sciences and NIST spinoff FSAB that still certifies them. It’s 2017 president is a bitemarker.
This work is for mostly lay-people and crime beginners, and has useful stories, explanations, graphics and language about a very broad subject matter. There are direct references to actual forensic applications through case narratives.
The authors are all top drawer scientific academics in their disciplines.
A bit of a counter-point to some of the above.
Now lets take a look at ‘epigenetics’ which is taking things about DNA to levels that are thrilling and as yet scientifically and socially precarious, according to some other trusted names in science and the law. What’s clear to me is that commercial labs and LEOs are drooling at the chance to take some college research papers to the courtroom. This article says all these facets of microbiome (your bacteria, fungi, and viruses), DNA phenotyping (what you look like) and personal environmental data (your contact with chemicals) will land in courts “none in the near future.” Considering how slow the law is in deciding what is junk expertise (it took decades for bitemarks to even get criticized in state courts), this palette of new tests might sneak in somewhere with nary of a whimper. I base this on how fast the US government is now demolishing climate change science in favor of pro-Big Energy lobbyists.
Posted in AAFS, ABFO, criminal justice reform, DNA mixtures, DNA profiling
Tagged CSI, DNA, DNA profiling, Forensic science, forensic science education
Leave a comment
Awesome list of recent NY Times articles about forensic science and police #AAFS2017
All of this is newsworthy and bridges forensic science, enforcement and criminal justice. Includes multiple pages of archives.
Topics on page one:
- Maggots
- Familial DNA in crime and civil rights
- Crime scene photography of the deceased.
- Christina Cattaneo identifying migrants lost at sea.
- Wrongful convictions and Janet Reno’s legacy about actual innocence.
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged CSI, exoneration, Forensic science, Miscarriage of justice, wrongful convictions
Leave a comment
Todays’ Latest Forensics and Law Info from the Web #AAFS2017
Immigration heroes from the past. The Royal College of Surgeons from 1938. “I am a refugee from Nazi oppression.”
Florida finger-print “expert” on the hot seat. Thousands of lawyers notified. Mr. Palacio is an 18 year crime lab veteran.
Epigenetic DNA profiling may be WAY ahead of its validation for “ageing” ppl. This article is standard fare of excited forensic optimism from limited source research. @maxmhouck says “No, not yet.”
Climate change “fake news” from the Trump/Republican duality of revisionistic ‘science.’
Survey of scientific fakery in research.
Many US states never audit their forensic rape kits. Now, THAT’s a real threat to public safety, right?
Procedures for Sampling Bone and Tooth Specimens for DNA (19 page). sop-for-sampling-bone-and-teeoth-specimens
A cockroach in her brain.
“Shaken Baby” triad considered “low quality evidence” in Sweden.
FORENSICS and LAW in FOCUS @ CSIDDS | News and Trends 