scholarly journals Ensuring the Reliability of Fire-Arm Identification Evidence

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 1-39
Author(s):  
Lirieka Meintjes ◽  
Tanyarara Mutsavi
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
South African ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
National Institute Of Justice ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Science Evidence

Notwithstanding the acceptance of firearm identification by courts, the scientific community has been reluctant to recognise firearm identification as a reliable method of conclusively establishing a connection between a particular bullet and a particular gun. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) in the United States (US) has categorised firearm identification as a discipline under forensic science, and forensic science has been described as a "fractured and burdened discipline". In addition, in 2009 the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) concluded that forensic science is broken. With regard to firearm identification, the NAS Report emphasised the need for sufficient studies to be done because this report regarded this type of evidence as unreliable and lacking repeatability. The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) Report, released in September 2016, came to a conclusion similar to that of the 2009 NAS Report with regard to forensic science evidence. With regard to firearm identification, the report asserted that firearm identification evidence still "falls short of the scientific criteria for foundational validity". It is disturbing that courts across the globe are using different types of forensic science without subjecting them to scrutiny so as to determine their reliability. In the light of this, reliability and validity have become important factors which demand attention in Anglo-American litigation, even in jurisdictions that do not have a formal reliability standard (such as England and Wales, and South Africa). This article shows the role of cross-examination in establishing the reliability of firearm expert evidence. It also focusses on the role that South African forensic practitioners, prosecutors, defence counsels and presiding officers can play in ensuring the reliability of firearm identification evidence

scholarly journals Beginning with Blood Patterns: Surface material and case information effects on trainee analysts’ judgments

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Hugh ◽  
Liam Satchell
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
The United States ◽  
Forensic Sciences ◽  
Surface Material ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Human Interpretation ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Blood Pattern Analysis

There is growing concern about human bias and limitations in forensic science practice. The United States National Academy of Sciences has specifically highlighted that forensic sciences “rely on human interpretation of what could be tainted by error” (Edwards and Gotsonis, 2009, p9). An array of literature has shown that particular domains of forensic science, such as fingerprint and DNA matching, are vulnerable to bias and error. Less attention has been paid to the process of blood pattern analysis. In the current study, a sample of 32 trainee blood pattern analysts from the United Kingdom were asked to report the number and type of stains present on six different surfaces. The surfaces were systematically varied in terms of colour and porosity. Further, participants were provided with ‘case information’ to investigate if details about the source of the stains would bias a re-appraisal of the stains. We found that the trainees found the dark, non-porous surfaces particularly challenging when identifying the number of stains present on a surface. The accuracy at detecting the specific types of stain varied more as a function of the individual trainee than the surface material. Case information had no effect on participants reappraising the stains. The results highlight particular materials that may require targeted tutoring for trainee blood pattern analysts.

scholarly journals A Template For Enhancing The Impact of The National Academy of Sciences’ Reporting on Forensic Science

2019 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amelia Shooter ◽  
Sarah L. Cooper
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Forensic Science ◽  
Lie Detection ◽  
The United States ◽  
Forensic Analysis ◽  
Think Tank ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Bullet Lead ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The National Academy of Sciences (NAS), established in 1863, is the United States’ leading science and technology think-tank, with an active commitment to advising government. Over the last 150 years, the NAS has, both independently and in conjunction with the federal government, investigated and reported on various issues of importance, ranging from space exploration and biosecurity, to STEM education and immigration. Due to growing concerns about particular disciplines (and specifically their application in legal proceedings), one issue the NAS has reported on between 1992 and 2009 is forensic science. Specifically, the NAS has published six reports commenting on the status of forensic science evidence in the USA, namely DNA Technology in Forensic Science (1992), The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence (1996), The Polygraph and Lie Detection (2003), Forensic Analysis: Weighing Bullet Lead Evidence (2004), Ballistic Imaging (2008), and Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward (2009). The response of stakeholders (including from political, legal, and academic spheres) to these reports has varied, ranging from shifts in practice and full acknowledgement, to considerable struggles to effectuate systemic reform. Using the different experiences of two reports – Forensic Analysis: Weighing Bullet Lead Evidence (2004) and Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward (2009) – as a vehicle, this article suggests how the NAS can strengthen the impact of its forensic science reporting, and how stakeholders can better harness the expertise of the NAS.

Mathematics, Peace, and the Cold War

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (5) ◽  
pp. 556-591 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brit Shields
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
New York University ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Political Role ◽  
Exchange Program ◽  
Mathematical Sciences ◽  
Academy Of Sciences

This paper seeks to combine studies of émigré scientists, Cold War American science, and cultural histories of mathematical communities by analyzing Richard Courant’s participation in the National Academy of Sciences interacademy exchange program with the Soviet Union in the 1960s. Following his dismissal by the Nazi government from his post as Director of the Göttingen Mathematics Institute in 1933, Courant spent a year at the University of Cambridge, and then immigrated to the United States where he developed the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences at New York University. Courant’s participation with the National Academy of Sciences interacademy exchange program at the end of his career highlights his ideologies about the mathematics discipline, the international mathematics community, and the political role mathematicians could play in contributing to international peace through scientific diplomacy. Courant’s Cold War scientific identity emerges from his activities as an émigré mathematician, institution builder, and international “ambassador.”

Climate Geoengineering and the Role of Public Deliberation: A Comment on the us National Academy of Sciences’ Recommendations on Public Participation

Climate Law ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2-4) ◽  
pp. 252-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
William C. G. Burns ◽  
Jane A. Flegal
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Public Deliberation ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
World Community ◽  
Design Considerations ◽  
The Us ◽  
The World ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Important Design

The feckless response of the world community to the mounting threat of climate change has led to a growing interest in climate geoengineering research. In early 2015, the us National Academy of Sciences released two major reports on the topic. While it is notable that both reports recommended some form of public participation to inform research, this article argues that the vagueness of these recommendations could mean that their implementation might not comport with optimal approaches for public deliberation. We outline some options for public deliberation on climate geoengineering and important design considerations.

Aspirin Use and Reye Syndrome

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 79 (6) ◽  
pp. 1049-1050
Author(s):  
RALPH E. KAUFFMAN ◽  
ROBERT J. ROBERTS
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Public Health Service ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Environmental Toxins ◽  
Reye Syndrome ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Metabolic Defects ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Service Task

The search for causes of Reye syndrome has resulted in colorful, if not controversial, incrimination of numerous factors including influenza, varicella, environmental toxins, aflotoxin, inherited metabolic defects, and various medications. Attempts to associate salicylates with Reye syndrome date from the 1960s1-3; most of these reports lacked sufficient design, conduct, or controls to implicate or exclude aspirin as a risk factor. Since 1980, several epidemiologic studies4-6 renewed concern and controversy regarding the role of aspirin in Reye syndrome. As a result, a Public Health Service Task Force was formed which culminated in the Centers for Disease Control/National Academy of Sciences pilot study7 which was designed to address the problems and shortcomings identified in the previous efforts to examine the role of aspirin as a causal factor in Reye syndrome.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document