1 / 9

implementing the NAS recommendations: Improving forensic reporting

This article discusses the necessity for improved forensic reporting as highlighted by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) recommendations. It critiques the current lack of transparency in forensic methods used in State Crime Lab reports, which often omit essential details about procedures and uncertainties. Proposed changes include legislative reforms to mandate comprehensive and standardized forensic reports, enhance accountability of analysts, and ensure that forensic evidence undergoes rigorous scrutiny in legal proceedings. This is vital for preventing wrongful convictions.

zia-talley
Télécharger la présentation

implementing the NAS recommendations: Improving forensic reporting

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. implementing the NAS recommendations:Improving forensic reporting Peter Moreno Wisconsin Innocence Project

  2. The need for better forensic reporting • In academics, the scientific paper is what allows reviewers to determine whether a scientist’s work is valid. • “[In forensic reporting], the norm is to have no description of the methods or procedures used, and most reports do not discuss measurement uncertainties or confidence limits.” NAS at 186.

  3. Typical Wisconsin State Crime Lab Report

  4. Two possible solutions • Change state law • Most forensic science is done in State Crime Labs, governed by state statute • Convince appellate courts to question forensic evidence and hold analysts accountable for their reports

  5. State legislative reform in WI • Make forensic science more open and equitable • Change the administrative structure and procedures at the State Crime Labs to make labs more neutral • Improve forensic reporting • Make forensic testing more available and transparent to defendants

  6. Legislative proposal regarding forensic reporting • Require full reports with standardized, detailed content, including methods used, raw data collected, potential sources of error, and quantified levels of certainty

  7. Legislative proposal regarding forensic reporting • Require defined terminology in reports • Anthony Hicks and Ralph Armstrong: “consistent” hairs led to wrongful convictions

  8. Legislative proposal regarding forensic reporting • Allow state-based forensic body to determine contents of reports by discipline

  9. Innocence Network Amicus Briefs • Require confrontation of the analyst at trial to explore content of the analyst’s report (and to encourage better reporting) • Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts (cited NAS report) (cannot introduce drug-analysis report without analyst) • Bullcoming v. New Mexico (cannot introduce BAC report through surrogate analyst who has no personalknowledge of test performed) • Williams v. Illinois (can State introduce substance of report through the opinion of another analyst?)

More Related