"News
first broken on
this blog
that DNA mixture evidence involved subjective interpretation by
technicians using non-standard methodologies and often dubious
probability calculations has completed the circle begun with the
publication of the 2009 National Academy of Sciences report, "
Strengthening Forensic Science: A Path Forward."
That document called into question the scientific basis for most
forensic evidence but gave DNA a pass. Now we know that much of
forensics in recent decades has been "pseudoscience," as
the Boston Review this week put it. And DNA mixture evidence, as
described recently by a Boston University quarterly,
"has never been about achieving certainty. It’s
about partial matches, probabilities, big-time math, and a healthy dose
of judgment calls by forensic scientists." Except that's not how it was
portrayed in court. Together, those two articles provide a good, quick,
backgrounder on the nascent crisis, really crises, undermining the
credibility, if not yet the status, of traditional forensic science."
http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.ca/2015/11/forensic-dentists-bite-back-limiting.html