Is Criminal Forensics Bullshit?
4 hours ago
- The 'CSI effect' is often misunderstood; jurors' increased expectations for scientific evidence stem from general awareness of forensic advances, not TV viewing habits.
- Blood pattern analysis (BPA) relies on shaky scientific foundations, with experts being correct less than 70% of the time on rigid surfaces and 62% on fabric, and opinions are subjective rather than scientific.
- Forensic ballistics has high misidentification rates, with experts misidentifying damaged bullets about 37% of the time.
- Drug-sniffing dogs produce false positives in nearly 75% of cases, due to poor training, residual odors, or handler cues.
- Judges need to enforce stricter standards for training, certification, and performance monitoring to ensure forensic evidence meets scientific muster.