Forensic Science is a mess, and the justice department wants to keep it that way.

AuthorCiaramella, C.J.
PositionCIVIL LIBERTIES

A WHITE HOUSE council has declared junk science all too common in the criminal justice system, but the Department of Justice is refusing to implement recommendations that would increase safeguards against scientifically invalid testimony and require greater disclosure of misconduct and shoddy work.

In September the President's Council of Advisers on Science and Technology (PCAST) released a report finding "a dismaying frequency of instances of use of forensic evidence"--such as analyses of hair, bite marks, and shoe prints--"that do not pass an objective test of scientific validity."

This is not just a theoretical problem. Last year, the FBI admitted that nearly every one of the experts at its microscopic hair analysis lab had given scientifically invalid testimony. The breaches affected almost 270 cases. Of those, 32 defendants were sentenced to death, and 14 were executed or died in prison.

When The Washington Post investigated the probe, it found that "while many prosecutors made swift and full disclosures [to defendants], many others did so incompletely, years late or not at all." One defense attorney only learned his client's case had been affected after he read it in the Post.

Despite these embarrassments, the Justice Department rejected PCAST's recommendations, which include requiring forensic experts to disclose high error rates in their testimony and discontinuing use of methods that haven't been independently verified.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch told The Wall Street Journal that "the department believes that the current legal standards regarding the admissibility of...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT