Tag Archives: forensic examiner error

The New Phrenology scam crops up in China and makes inroads in Criminal Justice…..again

Long determined to be forensically incompetent, some researchers are testing a hundred year old Bertillon Paradigm of criminal visage prediction for law enforcement. He did come up with the first consistent use of photography at crime scenes. Plus he is … Continue reading

Posted in forensic science reform protecting the innocent | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Blood spatter continues: It’s purveyors and assumption spur critics to express weaknesses

  This is a continuation of our previous blog on blood drops and criminal justice. It is expressly “old school” and experts really heavily on “experiments” both in courtrooms and their ‘spatter” rooms. Calling this science is also present in … Continue reading

Posted in forensic science reform protecting the innocent, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

“Almost junk forensic science” of blood spatter expertise – Its not as simple as it’s taught in class

Here is a good look at why “forensics” should be considered amateur-hour non-science in many jurisdictions. Article goes within a conviction that had the same cop being the crime evidence collector, analyst, and lead investigator. Much goes wrong in the … Continue reading

Posted in forensic science reform protecting the innocent | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

It takes decades for courts to react when #Forensic Failures occur; another example: Motherisk lab scandal

  Bitemarkers had cases overturned in the 90’s. Doubt’s about this pseudo-science claiming “uniqueness” started in the 1970’s ( See Gianelli¬†). No courts paid attention by their claiming “case acceptance” by similar brethren was overwhelming. We now know acceptance by … Continue reading

Posted in forensic science reform protecting the innocent | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Cautions suggested on using Bayesian Stats for all forensic purposes

Steve Lund and Hari Iyer are stat guys from the National Institute of Standards and Technology. They bring forth a broader look at the ever popular use of “likelihood ratios” to support personal and scientific opinions of “match” probabilities. https://phys.org/news/2017-10-nist-urges-caution-courtroom-evidence.html

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

1986 Junk Science article Prosecutors love to use – Predicting and “Curing” Recidivism

Much like using the 1978 revelation that bitemarks “convicted” serial killer Ted Bundy, this September 12th, 2017 article tracks the origins of another forensic myth still in effect in sexual offender¬† punishment masquerading as “therapy’ in Wisconsin. When Junk Science … Continue reading

Posted in forensic science reform protecting the innocent | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Fabric “matching” overwhelming DNA testing leads to execution gurney in Texas

Another story about lazy forensics sending defendants to the death chamber. DNA testing be damned, the police ‘science’ creates a unique match. Inmate scheduled for execution.¬† By Jordan Smith

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Fingerprint documentation of findings seems alot better than the bitemarkers

Using digital record keeping of the fingerprint characters observed during a comparison certainly exceeds what the bitemarkers have in their “guidelines.” Most case law allowing bitemarks into courts have the dentists declaring that bitemarks are like fingerprints. Usually all they … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

A “discrepant” view on flawed forensics leading to later exonerations – bitemarks at al.

A mighty effort by someone connected to the National Institute of Justice to blend ‘forward thinking’ about science and better crime lab management improving the reliability of criminal convictions. The author uses a blend of data that minimizes how many … Continue reading

Posted in forensic science reform protecting the innocent | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Making sure non data-driven forensics gets a pass in the courtroom – “I’m an examiner”

This is from a well positioned advocate of “source of the evidence” determinations being based on “expertise.” The writer has an affinity for bitemark analysis as well and worries about the DAs losing their advantage of using soft ‘police science’ … Continue reading

Posted in forensic science reform protecting the innocent | Tagged , , | Leave a comment