“Karen Kafadar is Commonwealth Professor and chair of the Department of Statistics at the University of Virginia and a member of theForensic Science Standards Board. Anne-Marie Mazza is the director of the Committee on Science, Technology and Law of the National Academy of Sciences. The authors contributed this article to Live Science’sExpert Voices: Op-Ed & Insights. ”

Comment: A vigorous statement from two ladies who know their scientific stuff. Article is here. 

===============================

“Forensics: The anatomy of crime” at the Wellcome Collection traces the art of forensic inquiry, spanning 18th-century Japanese artistic studies of decomposition to Victorian murder cases.”

Comment: These articles mention most of the major Brit cases from the 20th century where forensics played a part.

Article is here.

Video with another article is here. 

Dr. David Benjamin is a world renowned clinical pharmacologist and forensic toxicologist. Consequently, he has substantial experience involving forensic evidence and “expert” testimony. He recently gave a presentation at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences annual meeting in the Jurisprudence Section focused on Brady violations from a forensic perspective.

There is a mountain of material contained in the presentation, including some specific recommendations for how to combat and counter Brady violations involving forensic evidence and expert testimony.

If you would like to investigate this further, you can contact Dr. Benjamin through his website, and request a copy of the presentation by e’mail.

OSAC Subcommittee on Ondontology (sic)

The original source of this NIST  information is here. 

Other than originally mis-spelling ODONTOLOGY, this NIST subcommittee (OSAC) on Forensic Dentistry should do well dealing with dental identification from unknown human remains, but in the bitemark arena, everyone should realize bitemark identification group and certain of its allies compose the 63% of this panel. You can clearly exclude MARY BUSH from Buffalo as she has debunked the ABFO “bitemark science” in her ground-breaking research (partially funded by a forensic dental grant)  since 2007. She has also been publicly harassed by a bunch of the same ABFO members who are on this panel. The ABFOers will likely use their recently developed flow chart to assure their scientific certainties for bitemark IDs continue in US courts.

Politics is an amazing thing. I will highlight the panel members affiliated with the bitemark  believers in the following list. A…