“The victim was able to identify Kunco by virtue of a recognizable lisp.
Five months after the woman was attacked, an ultraviolet photograph of her back was enlarged and healed bite wounds were compared to a mold of Kunco’s teeth. Forensic experts testified at trial that the healed wounds matched Kunco’s dental impression.”
See more:
Kunco_Motion to Remand or Authorize (this request for a new trial was later denied)
and…….
All I can glean from scant web info is that its full speed ahead for the Forensic Science Regulator (actually a good idea in theory) oversight to become law but she doesn’t get any “enforcement control ( among other issues) and also that some major players feel left out.
“that key stakeholders had not been invited to attend the planning workshops for it.”
“These stakeholders included Dr Tully ( The Regulator herself) , the Crown Prosecution Service, the Criminal Cases Review Commission, the judiciary, defence lawyers, and leaders in the forensic science profession.”
“too much focused on policing”
We already know that the cops always get what they want, and everyone comes in second. Or last.
Article is at Police Professional
Here are the 2016 Forensic Science providers: “Codes of Practice and Conduct” promulgated by Gov.uk. Similar to the US National Forensic Science Commission’s workproduct, all of these “standards” are considered Guidance. That absolves the risk of anyone’s toes getting stepped on is they fall short. Unless you are Dr. Waney Squier, of course.
Overview of the prosecution’s bitemark case.
John Kunco has now exhausted his appellate review options in Pennsylvania.
Forensics in the News
A republish from the NY Legal Aid Society’s “DNA Newsletter” @CeliaGivens
6th Circuit US Court of Appeals rules in US v. Carpenter that the government did not violate defendants’ Fourth Amendment rights by collecting cell site records from robbery suspects without warrants. Regarding the court’s opinion, one spokesperson for the ACLU stated: “The majority’s opinion unfortunately fails to adequately account for the privacy violations made possible by the cell phones that we all need to carry around to live our lives normally…Comprehensive location tracking like this requires robust Fourth Amendment protections.” (ABA Journal)
NY state senate proposes legislation allowing law enforcement to use “textalyzer” devices on drivers suspected of using their phones before automobile accidents to determine if they were “unlawfully driving while distracted.” The new legislation would require individuals to hand over their phones to be searched or face driver’s license suspension—and driving with a suspension due to failure to submit to the “textalyzer” will be a new misdemeanor. The legislation has already passed the state assembly and state senate (Ars Technica)
Related: Cellebrite reportedly assisting FBI in unlocking iPhones from FBI/Apple privacy feud
A Bronx judge has issued an opinion holding that defendant Steven Byrd was not denied his right to a speedy trial after being “charged for his role in a 1998 murder 15 years after it was committed due to a faulty DNA profile match.” The NYC OCME made a transcription error when it uploaded the crime scene sample to CODIS in 2000, causing a decade-long delay in finding a suspect profile match (New York Law Journal)
Shortage of pathologists in United States heading towards national crisis; medical examiner’s offices reporting flawed investigations, delayed results and examinations, and in some cases, loss of accreditation and/or funding (Daily Breeze)
A new study shows FBI’s CODIS database may contain ancestry information, potential phenotyping data, contradicting the established view that CODIS markers provide no information indicative of race or ethnicity (Forensic Magazine)
Federal circuit rules “junk DNA” technology lacks patent eligibility (National Law Review)
Related: Genetic Technologies Ltd. v. Merial LLC Opinion
A legal article concludes that Kuwaiti law mandating all citizens and foreign residents to register their DNA with the government violates the Kuwaiti constitution. The Kuwaiti government has stated that failure to comply with the mass DNA collection would result in large fines, prison time and suspended issuance of passports (Kuwait Times)
Related: Digital Trends
Annie Dookhan, the former forensic analyst who pleaded guilty to evidence tampering in 2013 in more than 40,000 cases, has been released from prison on parole (Boston Globe)
Related: DNA Newsletter, Boston.com
Scientists use “synthetic biology” to experiment with genome editing (GenEng News)
No surprise here because, back in the Pistorius trial days, I thot nothing could match it (discounting Amanda Knox’s years of uncertainty) in recent history, but then “Making a Murder” jumped onto the silver screen (well, its a LCD screen these days)
With Pistorius facing new sentencing penalties in South Africa, a couple brothers are doing some CSI type speculations about skin injuries on Reeva Steenkamp’s body. Here we go. They appear to be able to “time” these injuries to “before” the shooting occurred. Hmmm
“The Molletts have just published their third book, Oscar vs The Truth (Piquet Publishers) and have drawn several shocking conclusions in relation to Reeva’s murder, including that two oval abrasions that were found on her back appeared to match the corner of the Lazer bat Pistorius said he had used to bash down the door after shooting.”
Read the article here.
Controlled Substances & Toxicology
Focus on DNA Sequencing
IPE & Trace Evidence
Postmortem Interval & Molecular Autopsy
The National Registry of Exonerations just published data on the various crime types of cases where exonerations occur.
DNA exonerations no longer occur primarily in rape cases, but in homicides, including many rape-murder cases.
In addition, the number of DNA exonerations in which non-DNA evidence was necessary for the exoneration is approaching the number where DNA alone conclusively proved innocence.
All told, rape is an element in 78% of known DNA exonerations (329/420). In that context, the shift since 2008 mostly means that DNA exonerations are increasingly about rape-murder rather than rape alone
Meet “Freddie the Fingerprint”
Reviewing the actual courtroom testimony of forensic experts is clearly the way to suggest “reforms” and to publish how examiners approach their “science” in diverse ways.
Sound familiar? Pathology. Bitemarks.
An interesting look at what goes on in the US courts about fingerprints. Authors have some compelling concerns:
Abstract
The question of the age of fingermarks is often raised in investigations and trials when suspects admit that they have left their fingermarks at a crime scene but allege that the contact occurred at a different time than the crime and for legal reasons. In the first part of this review article, examples from American appellate court cases will be used to demonstrate that there is a lack of consensus among American courts regarding the admissibility and weight of testimony from expert witnesses who provide opinions about the age of fingermarks. Of course, these issues are not only encountered in America but have also been reported elsewhere, for example in Europe. The disparity in the way fingermark dating cases were managed in these examples is probably due to the fact that no methodology has been validated and accepted by the forensic science community so far. The second part of this review article summarizes the studies reported on fingermark dating in the literature and highlights the fact that most proposed methodologies still suffer from limitations preventing their use in practice. Nevertheless, several approaches based on the evolution of aging parameters detected in fingermark residue over time appear to show promise for the fingermark dating field. Based on these approaches, the definition of a formal methodological framework for fingermark dating cases is proposed in order to produce relevant temporal information. This framework identifies which type of information could and should be obtained about fingermark aging and what developments are still required to scientifically address dating issues.
This is a short story but its carries an important metaphor about the “forensic science “reform” process rocketing through the media and courtrooms in the US and the UK.
A pertinent question I have is “how does the our legal system recognize that science within its confines is constantly changing and how does the Criminal Justice system adapt to issues of junk and questionable testimony from generally law enforcement prone experts?”
Its a mouthful, but “change within the court system” does not seem similar to dynamic change in other aspects of our social melieu as we experiences changes of consumer products, air bags, public health, health care, pharmaceuticals, pollution and ecosystem change. Answers or solutions to all these are commonly threaded with established legal oversight, or threats of regulatory control, or actual consumer law litigation by state and federal police agencies. However, legal institutions and agencies are not proactive, but reactive in addressing things that have already happened. To be exact, the government is usually NOT a first responder to public safety and Constitutional issues within criminal justice.
At this point, our legal systems are largely unprepared to handle the upcoming onslaught of appellate litigation regarding flawed and unreliable expert testimony. Science is improving but some prosecutors, Attorneys General and state courts are still driving a Model T.
Back to forensics.
Who has been proactive within forensic science and asking for more bases of science within the “police sciences?” A small group from within these disciplines does exist. At the forefront were a few prominent whistleblowers who started getting notice 30 years ago regarding major FBI Crime lab goofs. There were also other forensic examiners who learned some science and began to understand how prominent DNA would become. A few others since, although they may still be isolated from any consensus within their subject matter groups, have become vocal and volunteer to innocence projects (IP Network) across the US.
Some other change has occurred. Since the 2009 NAS Report on forensics, the professional meetings I have attended now contain talk about wrongful convictions as a fact, rather than just some crank accusations from money-grubbing lawyers (no exaggeration ). But, in the AAFS odontology (Dentistry) section, I apparently am the only experienced forensic dental type who talks about actual cases as showing systemic problems, but at least that’s a start.
A good example of people taking a hard look at their forensic methods are some members of the American Board of Forensic Odontology who are active in IP criminal litigation objecting to past use of bitemark pattern “identification” in prosecutions for the last 50 years. This tiny bunch (out of hundreds of self-proscribed forensic dentists in the US) take on cases which have become headline news in the exoneration world. It takes some courage to do this as many to all of these post-conviction bitemark cases (its up to 25 total) were prosecuted and helped by the “big guns” in bitemarks who were at their height of public crime fighting glory. I also have to give credit to those dentists (about 3 or 4) who have recanted their years-old testimony. That takes alot of guts. Some of them have said their “science” has improved. I don’t think that is accurate (there wasn’t any science to begin with), but it sure sounds good to most people and the courts.
So, I am giving credit where its due, as the ABFO is becoming incrementally more involved with wrongful convictions via these members who are stepping up. This is despite the group’s past leadership’s traits of dirty dealing towards those who have objected to their intransigent ways.
Death investigation within Medical Examiner/Coroner system has always been the most underfunded in the Law Enforcement Organization (LEO) systems. The numbers of boarded med path people is seriously declining. Working in such conditions certainly does not create much enthusiasm despite the high-tech fantasies of CSI shows. The incongruity of how important these investigations are to police and prosecutors “fighting crime” is striking.
Here is the mess that going on in Los Angeles.
FORENSICS and LAW in FOCUS @ CSIDDS | News and Trends 