Forensic Science Reform Website.
The Just Science Coalition is bringing us all together – a diverse range of voices dedicated to building consensus and supporting prompt federal action around a set of common principles and legislative objectives.
Our mission is to advocate for the governmental framework and resources necessary to ensure that forensic sciences in the United States are valid and reliable, and that their use in the criminal justice system promotes accurate justice: the protection of the innocent and the identification of the guilty. The coalition depends on the involvement, expertise and input of a broad range of contributors and members. Because the reach and impact of the NAS recommendations and the creation of a national forensic science oversight entity extend far beyond the work of forensic science practitioners and law enforcement, we believe that diversity in perspective is critical to determining how such an entity should be established and structured and what role it should play in both science and criminal justice. The release of the NAS findings is only the first step in this process, but we believe that by working together we can make tremendous strides toward ensuring reliability, validity and accuracy in forensics.
Unvalidated or improper forensic science is a leading cause of wrongful conviction in the United States.
Many techniques still in use today -- such as hair microscopy, bite mark comparisons, firearm testing or tool mark analysis – have never been subjected to rigorous scientific evaluation. Other methods – such as serology (commonly known as blood typing) – have been properly validated but are sometimes improperly conducted or inaccurately conveyed in trial testimony. In some cases, forensic analysts have fabricated results or engaged in other misconduct.
In approximately 50% of DNA exonerations, unvalidated or improper forensic science contributed to the wrongful conviction. But, while DNA exonerations are a window into the effect of unvalidated or improper forensic science contributing to wrongful convictions, DNA does not solve the problem. Experts estimate that only 5-10% of all criminal cases involve biological evidence that could be subjected to DNA testing. In the other 90-95% of crimes, DNA testing is not an option – so the criminal justice system relies on other kinds of evidence, including forensic disciplines that may not be scientifically sound or properly conducted.
As outlined in the National Academy of Sciences report, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward, many forensic disciplines have evolved primarily through their use in individual cases and have not been scientifically validated or standardized.
As a result, forensic analysts sometimes testify in cases without a proper scientific basis for their findings. Testimony about more dubious forensic disciplines, such as efforts to match a defendant’s teeth to marks on a victim or attempts to compare a defendant’s voice to a voicemail recording, are cloaked in science but lack even the most basic scientific standards. Even within forensic disciplines that are more firmly grounded in science, evidence is often made to sound more precise than it should. For example, analysts will testify that hairs from a crime scene “match” or “are consistent with” defendants’ hair – but because scientific research on validity and reliability of hair analysis is lacking, they have no way of knowing how rare these similarities are, so there is no way to know how meaningful this evidence is.
Links:
http://www.just-science.org/
http://www.just-science.org/news.html