scholarly journals Open forensic science*

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 255-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason M Chin ◽  
Gianni Ribeiro ◽  
Alicia Rairden
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Forensic Science ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Scientific Process ◽  
Forensic Evidence ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Forensic Scientists ◽  
Efficiency And Reliability ◽  
Rational Evaluation

Abstract The mainstream sciences are experiencing a revolution of methodology. This revolution was inspired, in part, by the realization that a surprising number of findings in the bioscientific literature could not be replicated or reproduced by independent laboratories. In response, scientific norms and practices are rapidly moving towards openness. These reforms promise many enhancements to the scientific process, notably improved efficiency and reliability of findings. Changes are also underway in the forensic. After years of legal-scientific criticism and several reports from peak scientific bodies, efforts are underway to establish the validity of several forensic practices and ensure forensic scientists perform and present their work in a scientifically valid way. In this article, the authors suggest that open science reforms are distinctively suited to addressing the problems faced by forensic science. Openness comports with legal and criminal justice values, helping ensure expert forensic evidence is more reliable and susceptible to rational evaluation by the trier of fact. In short, open forensic science allows parties in legal proceedings to understand and assess the strength of the case against them, resulting in fairer outcomes. Moreover, several emerging open science initiatives allow for speedier and more collaborative research.

scholarly journals Open Forensic Science

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Chin ◽  
Gianni Ribeiro ◽  
Alicia Rairden
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Forensic Sciences ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Forensic Evidence ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Forensic Scientists ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
False Discoveries ◽  
Efficiency And Reliability

The mainstream sciences are experiencing a revolution of methodology. This revolution was inspired, in part, by the realization that a surprising number of findings in the bioscientific literature could not be replicated or reproduced by independent laboratories and were likely false discoveries. In response – as reflected in a 2018 report of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine – scientific norms and practices are rapidly moving towards openness. These reforms promise many enhancements to the scientific process, notably improved efficiency and reliability of findings. Changes are also underway in the forensic sciences (although they have recently hit substantial political roadblocks). After years of legal-scientific criticism and several reports from peak scientific bodies, efforts are underway to establish the validity of several forensic practices and ensure forensic scientists perform and present their work in a scientifically valid way.In this article, the authors suggest that open science reforms are distinctively suited to addressing the problems faced by forensic science. Openness comports with legal and criminal justice values, helping ensure expert forensic evidence is more reliable and susceptible to rational evaluation by the trier of fact. In short, open forensic science allows parties in legal proceedings to understand and assess the strength of the case against them, resulting in fairer outcomes. Moreover, several emerging open science initiatives allow for speedier and more collaborative research. These, in many cases, may be readily applied to forensic science.

scholarly journals FORENSIC EVIDENCE: SCIENCE AND THE CRIMINAL LAW

2020 ◽  
pp. 053
Author(s):  
Filip Mirić
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Forensic Science ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Forensic Sciences ◽  
Forensic Evidence ◽  
The World ◽  
Close Study ◽  
Forensic Scientists

The Book Forensic Evidence: Science and the Criminal Law is intended to serve as an introductionand guide to the appreciation and understanding of the significant historical, contemporary, and future relationship between the world of the forensic sciences and the criminal justice system. This book is not intended to be a close study of forensic science, nor was it ever conceived as becoming one. It is devoted to a study of the judicial response to uses of forensic science in all phases of criminal procedure. The audience to which this study is directed are those intimately or potentially involved in that relationship: police, forensic scientists, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and professors and students- future lawyers.

Novel scientific methods in court

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 349-357
Author(s):  
Lucina Hackman ◽  
Niamh Nic Daeid
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
Unintended Consequence ◽  
Scientific Process ◽  
Forensic Evidence ◽  
Judicial Process ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
Scientific Domain ◽  
Scientific Disciplines ◽  
Scientific Advances

In recent decades the use of forensic science in investigations and therefore its subsequent presentation within the courts has increased exponentially, fuelled by an increase in scientific advances, development of databases and greater access to scientists and their expertise. This explosion in the use of forensic evidence has not been limited to one single scientific domain, as there are a broad range of scientific disciplines, encompassed by the general umbrella term' forensic science'. Many of these involve commonly applied methodologies and are accepted by the courts with limited scrutiny. Where tensions exist concerning the use of science in the courtroom is when novel or emerging sciences and scientific techniques are introduced. This may be particularly evident when the demands of the investigatory phase, where those working want to apply all possible tools at their disposal to gather as much evidence as possible and the needs of the courts, where the evidence must scientifically robust and admissible for it to be presented before a jury, come together. This paper examines the implications for the court for emerging or novel sciences and scientific techniques. In such cases, the potential rewards of implementing the scientific process and the information these may contribute to an investigation provides a temptation to investigators to push for their operational use, with the unintended consequence of posing an issue to the court when considering whether to admit the evidence into the judicial process.

Applying Microscopy in Forensic Science

1998 ◽  
Vol 4 (S2) ◽  
pp. 490-491
Author(s):  
Henry C. Lee
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Forensic Science ◽  
Real World ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Serial Killer ◽  
Trace Evidence ◽  
Physical Evidence ◽  
Forensic Scientist ◽  
Forensic Scientists

Microscopy is of vital importance in the real world of the forensic scientist. In today's society, physical evidence is critical to the criminal justice system for the detection, investigation and prosecution of criminal acts. A trail of microscopic fibers led investigators in Atlanta to the conviction of the serial killer, Wayne Williams. Flecks of paint on a hit-run victim, analyzed microscopically, can be compared with the paint on a suspect vehicle to exclude or match it to the crime. The forensic firearms examiner compares the microscopic striations on a bullet to match it to the gun it was fired from. Microscopes are used throughout the modern forensic laboratory. They are essential in searching for evidence. They aid the examiner in identifying and comparing trace evidence. As the scales of justice symbolize forensic science, microscopes symbolize the trace evidence examiner.Because of the variety of physical evidence, forensic scientists use several types of microscopes in their investigations.

Defence against the modern arts: the curse of statistics: Part I—FRStat

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cedric Neumann
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
Probabilistic Models ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Statistical Modelling ◽  
Probabilistic Framework ◽  
Science Center ◽  
Forensic Evidence ◽  
Probative Value ◽  
Forensic Scientists

Abstract For several decades, legal and scientific scholars have argued that conclusions from forensic examinations should be supported by statistical data and reported within a probabilistic framework. Multiple models have been proposed to quantify and express the probative value of forensic evidence. Unfortunately, the use of statistics to perform inferences in forensic science adds a layer of complexity that most forensic scientists, court offices and lay individuals are not armed to handle. Many applications of statistics to forensic science rely on ad hoc strategies and are not scientifically sound. The opacity of the technical jargon that is used to describe these probabilistic models and their results, and the complexity of the techniques involved make it very difficult for the untrained user to separate the wheat from the chaff. This series of article is intended to help forensic scientists and lawyers recognize limitations and issues in tools proposed to interpret the results of forensic examinations. This article focuses on the tool proposed by the Latent Print Branch of the U.S. Defense Forensic Science Center (DFSC) and called FRStat. In this article, I explore the compatibility of the results outputted by FRStat with the language used by the DFCS to report the conclusions of their fingerprint examinations, as well as the appropriateness of the statistical modelling underpinning the tool and the validation of its performance.

scholarly journals Expert witness codes of conduct for forensic practitioners: a review and proposal for reform

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Chin ◽  
Rory McFadden
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Forensic Scientists ◽  
The Way

In response to many miscarriages of justice attributed to forensic science, stakeholders in the justice system have proposed several reforms. One such reform is the broader use of expert witness codes of conduct to control the way in which forensic scientific evidence is reported in legal proceedings. In this article, the authors attempt to continue this discussion in three ways. They (1) review the use of expert witness codes of conduct in Australia and (2) compare that to their use in the civil context in Canada. The authors rely on that analysis to (3) suggest that a consensus-based code of conduct, modeled on reforms going on outside of forensic science, may assist in encouraging fuller and more cautious reporting by forensic scientists in Canadian courts.

Defence against the modern arts: the curse of statistics—Part II: ‘Score-based likelihood ratios’

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-42
Author(s):  
Cedric Neumann ◽  
Madeline Ausdemore
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
Bayes Factor ◽  
Probabilistic Models ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Geometrical Approach ◽  
Likelihood Ratios ◽  
Forensic Evidence ◽  
Probative Value ◽  
Forensic Scientists

Abstract For several decades, legal and scientific scholars have argued that conclusions from forensic examinations should be supported by statistical data and reported within a probabilistic framework. Multiple models have been proposed to quantify and express the probative value of forensic evidence. Unfortunately, the use of statistics to perform inferences in forensic science adds a layer of complexity that most forensic scientists, court officers and lay individuals are not armed to handle. Many applications of statistics to forensic science rely on ad-hoc strategies and are not scientifically sound. The opacity of the technical jargon used to describe probabilistic models and their results, and the complexity of the techniques involved make it very difficult for the untrained user to separate the wheat from the chaff. This series of papers is intended to help forensic scientists and lawyers recognize limitations and issues in tools proposed to interpret the results of forensic examinations. This article focuses on tools that have been proposed to leverage the use of similarity scores to assess the probative value of forensic findings. We call this family of tools ‘score-based likelihood ratios’. In this article, we present the fundamental concepts on which these tools are built, we describe some specific members of this family of tools, and we compare them explore to the Bayes factor through an intuitive geometrical approach and through simulations. Finally, we discuss their validation and their potential usefulness as a decision-making tool in forensic science.

scholarly journals The Influence of Microspectroscopy on Evaluating and Analyzing Forensic Evidence

2006 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 6-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
John A. Reffner ◽  
Pauline E. Leary
Keyword(s):  
Solid State ◽  
Forensic Science ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Forensic Evidence ◽  
Testing Hypotheses ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
Standards Of Evidence ◽  
Forensic Scientists

The evaluation and analysis of evidence using infrared, Raman, and SEM/EDX microprobe methods has advanced forensic science. Forensic science deals with the interaction of science with the law. This interaction requires that certain standards are met before scientific evidence is admitted in either a civil or criminal case. While the Court's burden of proof is different for a civil case than for a criminal case, the standards of evidence admissibility are not. Forensic scientists must defend their methods and conclusions in Court, regardless of whether they are a trace analyst identifying fibers, a drug analyst determining if the white powder found on a suspected criminal was cocaine, or a pharmaceutical researcher discovering new solid-state forms of a drug. Today, microspectroscopy is a primary technology used within all forensic science disciplines to increase the value of evidence. Modern microbeam methods are extending observations, enhancing documentation, providing additional information, aiding deductions, and testing hypotheses. This increase in value of scientific evidence is pivotal in adjudicating both civil and criminal litigation.

Sem/X-Ray Applications to the Forensic Science Field

1976 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
pp. 390-391
Author(s):  
K. Culbreth
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
Depth Of Field ◽  
Surface Phenomena ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Forensic Evidence ◽  
Science Field ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Hit And Run ◽  
Evaluation Of Evidence ◽  
Scanning Electron

The introduction of scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive x-ray analysis to forensic science has provided additional methods by which investigative evidence can be analyzed. The importance of evidence from the scene of a crime or from the personal belongings of a victim and suspect has resulted in the development and evaluation of SEM/x-ray analysis applications to various types of forensic evidence. The intent of this paper is to describe some of these applications and to relate their importance to the investigation of criminal cases.The depth of field and high resolution of the SEM are an asset to the evaluation of evidence with respect to surface phenomena and physical matches (1). Fig. 1 shows a Phillips screw which has been reconstructed after the head and shank were separated during a hit-and-run accident.

PROBLEMS AND TRENDS OF DEVELOPMENT OF BRANCHES OF CRIMINALISTIC TECHNOLOGY

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vitaliy Elyotnov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
Video Recording ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Forensic Photography ◽  
Forensic Research ◽  
Forensic Scientists ◽  
Further Development

The article examines the key provisions of traditional and developing branches of forensic technology as a branch of the forensic science. The article analyzes modern publications of domestic and foreign scientists dedicated to the problems of forensic technology. Discussion issues and gaps existing in the theory and practice of such branches of forensic technology as forensic photography and video recording, forensic phonoscopy, forensic traceology, forensic weapons science, forensic documentation, forensic research of substances, materials and products, forensic registration, etc. The opinions of individual forensic scientists on the resolution of controversial issues of forensic technology are given. The scientific directions that have not received at present recognition of independent branches of forensic technology are indicated. The promising areas of research in the framework of the branches of forensic technology are named, the main trends of its further development are formulated.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document