best casino bonuses australian online casino au dollars trusted online gambling internet casino download old information online us casinos las vegas best online casino craps flash casino games mac play online vegas

Get Our Newsletter



Links

Columnists



Site Search


Entire (RSS)
Comments (RSS)

Archive Calendar

February 2009
S M T W T F S
« Jan   Mar »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728

Guides

How to Become a Bounty Hunter



Scientific Report Cites Shoddy Lab Results in Court

Some of the lab evidence being introduced into criminal trials these days is shameful. It’s really been no secret. Here’s a report that spells it out.

By SOLOMON MOORE
New York Times
Forensic evidence that has helped convict thousands of defendants for nearly a century is often the product of shoddy scientific practices that should be upgraded and standardized, according to accounts of a draft report by the nation’s pre-eminent scientific research group.
The report by the National Academy of Sciences is to be released this month. People who have seen it say it is a sweeping critique of many forensic methods that the police and prosecutors rely on, including fingerprinting, firearms identification and analysis of bite marks, blood spatter, hair and handwriting.
The report says such analyses are often handled by poorly trained technicians who then exaggerate the accuracy of their methods in court. It concludes that Congress should create a federal agency to guarantee the independence of the field, which has been dominated by law enforcement agencies, say forensic professionals, scholars and scientists who have seen review copies of the study. Early reviewers said the report was still subject to change.

For Full Story


Print This Post Print This Post

Write a comment

You need to login to post comments!