Turning The Investigation On The Science Of Forensics

Turning the Investigation on the Science of Forensics

Turning the Investigation on the Science of Forensics

The criminal justice system is intimately tied to the practice of forensic science. Attorneys, judges, and juries all rely on forensic evidence presented in the courtroom to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused. For many in the public, their understanding of forensic science comes from the world of entertainment exclusively. Popular shows like CSI, NCIS give the impression that forensic science is nearly infallible, and not only that, but it can be done in 12 minutes or three, always conclusive, very high-tech. However, the reality is very far from the depiction. Today, we learn about the state of science in forensic disciplines. We will see that some fields, like DNA analysis, use reliable methods and techniques rooted in scientific research. Others, for the most part, arise from the law enforcement community. And you know, they have their place, but not backed up by science. We will also see that other fields of forensics such as ballistics, bite marks, fingerprints, hair follicles, all that kind of thing where the scientific foundation simply is not there, leaving the results of some analysis in doubt.

Autopsy of a Crime Lab

This book exposes the dangerously imperfect forensic evidence that we rely on for criminal convictions. "That's not my fingerprint, your honor," said the defendant, after FBI experts reported a "100-percent identification." The FBI was wrong. It is shocking how often they are. Autopsy of a Crime Lab is the first book to catalog the sources of error and the faulty science behind a range of well-known forensic evidence, from fingerprints and firearms to forensic algorithms. In this devastating forensic takedown, noted legal expert Brandon L. Garrett poses the questions that should be asked in courtrooms every day: Where are the studies that validate the basic premises of widely accepted techniques such as fingerprinting? How can experts testify with 100-percent certainty about a fingerprint, when there is no such thing as a 100 percent match? Where is the quality control at the crime scenes and in the laboratories? Should we so readily adopt powerful new technologies like facial recognition software and rapid DNA machines? And why have judges been so reluctant to consider the weaknesses of so many long-accepted methods? Taking us into the lives of the wrongfully convicted or nearly convicted, into crime labs rocked by scandal, and onto the front lines of promising reform efforts driven by professionals and researchers alike, Autopsy of a Crime Lab illustrates the persistence and perniciousness of shaky science and its well-meaning practitioners.