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.
“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)
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:
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.
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.
All of this is newsworthy and bridges forensic science, enforcement and criminal justice. Includes multiple pages of archives.
Topics on page one:
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.
All this claptrap from climate deniers hired as Trump’s Congressional ‘science’ appointees relies on claim of “fake data” published a Brit tabloid. If you read through this short piece, it will resound with the “one paper now debunked” proof aka the “anti-vaxxers mantra.” I’m certain 1/2 of this committee are Evolutionists.
Blocking government data continues by the Trump cabal of mind controllers. I’m sure this affects and favors BigPharma more than than the media realizes. Animal welfare data blocked by US Agriculture Dept.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2017/02/03/the-usda-abruptly-removes-animal-welfare-information-from-its-website/?utm_term=.afc99012d968
In a world that does not conform to much common sense, some reports exist from December 2016 and today that DJT’s Executive Branch admin (which started today) poses a threat to existing weather and environmental data. Does this supposition apply elsewhere in the realm of governmental controlled research and criminal justice data? What about forensic grants and funded experimentation and social justice research?
Just askin’.
By the way, right after the 45th president was christened this morning, the White House website on climate change was junked according to followers on Twitter. (caveat emptor)
Disappearing WH climate change website: (CNBC today).
Scientist are frantically copying weather data, fearing it would vanish under Trump. Washington Post.(Dec 2016).
The Verge (Dec 2016)
I just found five Internet sites that claim to have free access to our latest book. All of this leads to reasons why journals subscriptions and textbooks are $$$ and out of reach to many of us as the honest consumer pays the price for shoplifting and fraud. Authors also get the shaft. A Russian “lady researcher” and the Sci-Hub pirate site make their play by saying “science belongs to no one,” and how capitalism is “illegal.”
Sci-Hub access page (download from Russia. What’s to lose with that?).
This article from 2016 explains this threat ( or boon for some) to big business.
Science Alert: “Researcher illegally shares millions of science papers free online to spread knowledge.”
