Managing Uncertainty in Forensic and Expert Evidence Cases

In Chapter 1 of this edited collection of new essays Paul Roberts surveys the current forensic science landscape, from the perspective of an English legal scholar. His primary objective is to ‘make sense’ of this massive, diverse, fragmented and somewhat contested terrain. Having listed no fewer than twenty different ways in which forensic science evidence has been viewed as problematic, Roberts proceeds to elucidate the epistemological grounds for rational reliance on expert evidence and to consider the structural properties and resilience of the regulatory and procedural frameworks which govern this type of evidence in England and Wales. He then turns his attention to the ‘intellectual resources’ of ‘forensic science’, understood expansively to include models of evidential interpretation and frameworks for structuring inferential reasoning (including ‘Bayesian’ approaches). Roberts stresses the complexity and dynamism of the regulatory challenge of guaranteeing the reliability of forensic science evidence. Legal scholars have tended to focuses on doctrinal issues, especially the task of formulating suitable evidentiary rules to regulate the admissibility of forensic science evidence in contested trials. Further reflection quickly demonstrates that admissibility is not the only doctrinal question posed by forensic science (and other expert) evidence; and moreover, doctrinal questions barely scratch the surface of the broader and deeper institutional, scientific, socio-legal and jurisprudential ‘problematic’ of forensic science.

Two experimental studies examined the effect of opposing expert testimony on perceptions of the reliability of unvalidated forensic evidence (anthropometric facial comparison). In the first study a...

Introduction: The position of forensic expert evidence stands on the nature of the dualism of expert evidence, on one side of the expert evidence in the form of reports or post mortem et Repertum can still be assessed as expert evidence on the other side of the expert evidence in the form of reports also touches the letter evidence, but decision-making will be the nature of the dualism of forensic expert evidence lies in the confidence of the judge in making a decision. Forensic medicine plays a role in determining the causal relationship between an act and the consequences that will cause injury to the body or cause health problems or cause the death of a person (causal verbend).Purposes of the Research: The purpose of this study is to explain paradiqma conviction and judgment Judge tehadapa Forensic Medicine against murder case.Methods of the Research: The research method used is normative legal research with a statute legal approach and a conceptual approach.Results of the Research: The testimony of forensic experts is essentially not binding on the judge. However, in a criminal procedure if it is necessary and the purpose is presented experts to explain the case, explain the cause and effect of the defendant's guilt in committing a criminal act, forensic expert testimony is needed in the trial.

ABSTRACTThe Innocence Project has enabled, amongst many other things, quantification of contributors to wrongful convictions in the United States. There, individual cases of wrongful conviction have multiple causes, including problems with forensic expert evidence. The Criminal Cases Review Commission in England and Wales has found that amongst unsafe convictions there, forensic expert evidence has been a feature. Apply the English experience with unsafe convictions to Australia, and there would be many more cases than we know of. The Victorian Supreme and County Court Practice Note on Expert Evidence (2014) has reduced the risk that providers of expert evidence could contribute to wrongful convictions, but more needs to be done. The medical sector generally has a huge research capability and capacity. In comparison the forensic pathology sector is tiny and is characterized more by its focus on managing workloads. Conclusions about the cause of death are not testable, and other opinions provided by forensic pathologists are derived from medical sciences, and not from specific evidence-based research. This does not mean that forensic pathology evidence is inherently unreliable, but it does mean that more work is required to better establish that reliability.

Forensic evidence plays a critical role in court proceedings and the administration of justice. It is a powerful tool that can help convict the guilty and avoid wrongful conviction of the innocent. Unfortunately, flaws in forensic evidence are increasingly becoming apparent. Assessments of forensic science have too often focused only on the data and the underlying science, as if they exist in isolation, without sufficiently addressing the process by which forensic experts evaluate and interpret the evidence. After all, it is the forensic expert who observes the data and makes interpretations, and therefore forensic evidence is mediated by human and cognitive factors. A U.S. National Research Council examination of forensic science in 2009, followed by a 2016 evaluation by a presidential panel, along with a U.K. inquiry into fingerprinting in 2011 and a 2015 guidance by the U.K. Forensic Science Regulator, have all expressed concerns about biases in forensic expert decision-making. Where does forensic bias come from, and how can we minimize it?

This work presents an odd historical record obtained through more than 14 years of research regarding one of the first major European forensic cases. The presumed homicide of Mário Guilherme Augusto de Sampaio in 1890 was allegedly perpetrated by his uncle, the prestigious doctor Vicente Urbino de Freitas. This famous poisoning had international repercussions for decades, with the participation of several forensic experts that made the history of forensic sciences, namely forensic toxicology and pathology. This third work aims to collect, restore, and analyse all the forensic evidence, particularly from the autopsy, toxicological, and psychiatric forensic reports. Facts regarding the life of Vicente Urbino de Freitas during his exile in Brazil were also recovered, along with a vast and outstanding assortment of forensic medicine photographs from the 19th century.

Floating Lungs: Forensic Science in Self-Induced Abortion Prosecutions

Forensic science has become an indispensable tool in modern criminal investigations and the administration of justice. In the Indian legal framework, forensic evidence plays a pivotal role in bridging the gap between law enforcement agencies and the judiciary, offering scientific validation in the pursuit of truth. This paper explores the historical evolution, legal provisions, and operational dynamics of forensic science in India, shedding light on its significance in criminal investigations and trials. The study begins with an overview of forensic science and its integration into the Indian justice delivery system. It examines key milestones in the development of forensic practices in India and landmark cases that have underscored their importance in judicial decision-making. The paper further analyzes the legal framework governing forensic evidence, focusing on provisions within the Indian Evidence Act and the Code of Criminal Procedure, alongside judicial interpretations that have shaped its admissibility and reliability. Additionally, the study investigates the role of investigative agencies, including the responsibilities of police and forensic experts, and highlights the challenges faced in the coordination between law enforcement and forensic laboratories. A critical evaluation of technical, infrastructural, and human resource challenges reveals significant gaps hindering the effective utilization of forensic science in criminal justice. The paper concludes by identifying opportunities for reform, advocating for enhanced training, upgraded infrastructure, and robust legal provisions to strengthen the forensic science ecosystem in India. Through this analysis, the study aims to provide valuable insights for policymakers, legal practitioners, and forensic experts to address existing challenges and optimize the potential of forensic science in ensuring justice and accountability within the Indian legal system.

The Admissibility of Social Science Evidence in Criminal Cases

The omnipresence of images within contemporary society has impacted on how visual evidence is perceived and presented within the criminal justice system. Currently there are no universally recognised methodological principles or practices established that allow robust and reliable forensic evaluation of images. The objective of this research was to elucidate critical conceptual and pragmatic principles for the development of a methodological framework aimed to support the forensic photointerpretation of photographic evidence. Using a mixed method research design, this project explored three methodological approaches, namely criteria, comparative and reconstructive based photointerpretation methods. Case studies, literary reflection, experimentation and evidence-based discussion were employed to unpack and investigate nuanced and complex concepts, values and principles required for consideration when using photographs as sources of evidence. Six key principles were derived from the values elucidated in response to each investigated approach. These principles consisted of methodology; objectivity; suitability; verifiability; specialised knowledge and error. The model developed by this research promotes transparency and clarity towards the process of photographic interpretation as forensic evidence presented within the criminal justice system.

Forensic evidence, long considered a cornerstone of criminal justice, has faced increasing scrutiny as recent studies and reports expose significant flaws in its scientific foundation. Techniques such as latent fingerprint analysis, microscopic hair comparison, and ballistics matching, which had been widely accepted for decades, are now being challenged for their lack of empirical validation. Yet, despite the growing acknowledgement of widespread issues affecting the reliability and validity of many types of forensic evidence, there are surprisingly few successful challenges to the admissibility of this type of forensic evidence, and, when the evidence is challenged, it is often found to be admissible. In the United States, Daubert and Rule 702 mandate that expert evidence be based on reliable principles and methods, but many courts have failed to rigorously apply these standards, often deferring to precedent rather than conducting a thorough analysis of the scientific validity of forensic techniques. This article argues that cognitive biases play a significant role in the US judicial system’s continued acceptance of unreliable forensic evidence. In particular, judges may rely on precedent as a heuristic – or cognitive shortcut – to admit unreliable forensic evidence, even in the face of new scientific evidence challenging the validity of that evidence. In this way, what appears to be deference to precedent may instead be the impact of various cognitive biases on the judge’s decision making. The discussion also considers how the bias blind spot contributes to judges’ reluctance to reject longstanding, but scientifically flawed, forensic techniques. Notwithstanding these challenges, judicial education on scientific standards, greater diversity on the bench, and a heightened awareness of cognitive biases and debiasing strategies could help mitigate these issues and promote more rigorous evaluation of forensic evidence in the courtroom.

Field-based detection of biological samples for forensic analysis: Established techniques, novel tools, and future innovations

Source identification of human biological materials in crime scene plays an important role in reconstructing the crime process. Searching specific genetic markers to identify the source of different human biological materials is the emphasis and difficulty of the research work of legal medical experts in recent years. This paper reviews the genetic markers which are used for identifying the source of human biological materials and studied widely, such as DNA methylation, mRNA, microRNA, microflora and protein, etc. By comparing the principles and methods of source identification of human biological materials using different kinds of genetic markers, different source of human biological material owns suitable marker types and can be identified by detecting single genetic marker or combined multiple genetic markers. Though there is no uniform standard and method for identifying the source of human biological materials in forensic laboratories at present, the research and development of a series of mature and reliable methods for distinguishing different human biological materials play the role as forensic evidence which will be the future development direction.

Today, cloud computing has developed a transformative model for the organization, business, governments that brings huge potentials and turn into popular for pay as you go, on-demand service, scalability and efficient services. However, cloud computing has made the concern for forensic data because of the architecture of cloud system is not measured appropriately. Due to the distributed nature of the cloud system, many aspects relating to the forensic investigation such as data collection, data storage, crime target, data violation are difficult to achieve. Investigating the incidents in the cloud environment is a challenging task because the forensics investigator still needs to relay on the third party such as cloud service provider for performing their investigation tasks. It makes the overall forensic process difficult to complete with a duration and presented it to the court. Recently, there are some cloud forensics studies to address the challenges such as evidence collection, data acquisition, identifying the incidents and so on. However, still, there is a research gap in terms of consistency of analysing forensic evidence from distributed environment and methodology to analyse the forensic data in the cloud. This thesis contributes towards the direction of addressing the research gaps. In particular, this work proposes a forensic investigation framework CeFF: A framework for forensics enabled cloud investigation to investigate evidence in the cloud computing environment. The framework includes a set of concepts from organisational, technical and legal perspectives, which gives a holistic view of analysing cybercrime from organisation context where the crime has occurred through technical context and legal impact. The CeFF also includes a systematic process that uses the concept for performing the investigation. The cloud-enabled forensics framework meets all the forensics related requirement such as data collection, examination, presents the report, and identifies the potential risks that can consider while investigating the evidence in the cloud-computing environment. Finally, the proposed CeFF is applied to a real-life example to validate its applicability. The result shows that CeFF supports analysing the forensic data for a crime occurred in cloud-based system in a systematic way.

Forensic economics experts (FE) working with attorneys engaged in litigation, whether consulting, preparing a report, or testifying at deposition or trial, generally are expected to have some knowledge (1) of the state’s statutory and case law regarding allowable damages and methods; and (2) that certain topics (e.g., taxes, collateral sources) should not be mentioned or considered at certain times since a mistrial could result. This situation creates a tension: forensic economics experts are economics experts and are not attorneys, but nonetheless must have a reasonable understanding of the relevant state law. In this vein, the Journal of Forensic Economics (JFE) continues to publish a series of articles on the ways such damages are calculated in different state jurisdictions, one state at a time.2 The state of South Dakota is included in this issue and this paper adds Illinois to the list. Following the format of previous articles in this JFE series, Section II provides a listing of the controlling statutes, general case law, and court rules. Section III discusses the concept of earning capacity which appears throughout PI and WD case law in Illinois. Section IV discusses discounting to present value. Fringe benefits are discussed in Section V, while Section