QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Defense attorneys who have tried to bring attention to the lab’s malfeasance also welcomed the commission’s statement as a vindication. “It was nice that the commission called out UIC about what they were really trying to do: discourage litigation against them as opposed to provide an honest and independent evaluation,” said Donald Ramsell, who specializes in DUI defense and has been vocal about the problems with the UIC lab for years.
--------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Members of the commission’s quality systems subcommittee, which includes scientists from the state’s publicly funded crime labs and a retired Cook County judge, met five times over the course of six months to pore over UIC’s report line by line. They found it contained “insufficient factual or scientific support” for two key conclusions: That the lab’s methods conformed with scientific standards prior to 2019 and that analysts appropriately processed urine samples to test for the presence of delta-9 THC. Because UIC’s report was not authored by independent subject-matter experts, the commission “does not consider the UIC Report to be an authoritative document for criminal justice stakeholders to evaluate the competency or accuracy of forensic testing, reporting, and testifying performed by” the UIC lab."
-----------------------------------------
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Fallout from the lab’s testing continues to play out in court. In January 2025, DuPage County State’s Attorney Robert Berlin exonerated 18 people and dropped one person’s pending DUI charges that stemmed from testing done by the lab. “With the validity of the test results called into question, I could not, legally, ethically and in good conscience, continue the prosecution of these select cases,” Berlin said in a statement at the time. The number of people who may have been wrongfully convicted based on the UIC lab’s faulty work remains unknown. Neither the university nor prosecutors’ offices that relied on the lab’s evidence have notified potentially impacted individuals that questions have been raised about the validity of the lab’s testing results. Injustice Watch is aware of two active cases in which defendants in Lake and Will counties have been charged with the help of evidence provided by the lab." The revelations about the lab have also brought renewed attention to the case of William Bishop, who is serving a 31-year prison sentence for murder and aggravated DUI. The DUI charges stemmed from the lab’s analysis of his blood after he caused a fatal car crash in rural McHenry County in 2020. Prosecutors argued for murder charges on the theory that Bishop was over the legal limit for THC and that his use of marijuana brought on the psychotic delusions that caused him to collide with another vehicle. Multiple psychiatrists disagreed at trial, presenting evidence of Bishop’s bipolar disorder in support of his insanity defense. Still, a judge found Bishop guilty."
--------------------------------------------
STORY: "State forensic science commission blasts UIC over rogue crime lab," by Maya Dukmasova, published by Injustice Watch, on March 19, 2026.
SUB-HEADING: "The Illinois Forensic Science Commission called on the university to conduct a proper audit of its lab, which has been responsible for nearly two dozen wrongful DUI convictions.
GIST: "An investigation published by Injustice Watch last year found that between 2016 and 2024, the lab’s analysts tested people’s body fluid samples for cannabinoids in more than 2,200 cases using discredited scientific approaches and faulty machinery, and the lab’s lead toxicologist had testified about test results in misleading ways. The lab mostly tested samples for DUI investigations by law enforcement agencies in 17 Illinois counties.
More than a year after UIC shut down human testing at the lab, lawyers hired by the university issued a report in May 2025 downplaying the scale and implications of the crisis at the lab. The university’s report concluded that the lab’s methods were “at all times appropriate and met accepted scientific standards” and none of its analysts “knowingly provided false testimony in criminal proceedings.”
However, the commission said it found the university’s report “insufficient to address the allegations” about improper testing at the lab.
“The content of the attorney-authored UIC Report suggests a fundamental lack of understanding of forensic toxicology principles, forensic laboratory quality systems, and the duties and responsibilities of an accredited forensic testing laboratory to its end users,” the commission’s report concluded.
Members of the commission’s quality systems subcommittee, which includes scientists from the state’s publicly funded crime labs and a retired Cook County judge, met five times over the course of six months to pore over UIC’s report line by line. They found it contained “insufficient factual or scientific support” for two key conclusions: That the lab’s methods conformed with scientific standards prior to 2019 and that analysts appropriately processed urine samples to test for the presence of delta-9 THC.
Because UIC’s report was not authored by independent subject-matter experts, the commission “does not consider the UIC Report to be an authoritative document for criminal justice stakeholders to evaluate the competency or accuracy of forensic testing, reporting, and testifying performed by” the UIC lab.
UIC’s lab was the only one in the country that quantified THC in urine for Illinois law enforcement — something that isn’t scientifically possible because THC itself does not show up in urine, and the THC metabolites that do are useless for establishing whether someone was high while driving. In 2021, the lab also discovered it could not distinguish between delta-9 and another, legal form of THC, but did nothing to fix its testing methods.
The commissioners called on the university to immediately conduct a “comprehensive audit” led by an independent organization staffed with scientific experts qualified to evaluate lab operations.
UIC declined to make anyone in a position of administrative authority over the laboratory available for an interview about the commission’s statement. In a written statement, UIC’s senior associate director of university communications, Brian Flood, told Injustice Watch the university “remains committed to upholding the highest standards of laboratory research integrity and compliance. The Illinois Forensic Science Commission’s statement and recommendations reflect its views and analysis. We are carefully reviewing its assessment.”
Fallout from the lab’s testing continues to play out in court
In January 2025, DuPage County State’s Attorney Robert Berlin exonerated 18 people and dropped one person’s pending DUI charges that stemmed from testing done by the lab. “With the validity of the test results called into question, I could not, legally, ethically and in good conscience, continue the prosecution of these select cases,” Berlin said in a statement at the time.
The number of people who may have been wrongfully convicted based on the UIC lab’s faulty work remains unknown. Neither the university nor prosecutors’ offices that relied on the lab’s evidence have notified potentially impacted individuals that questions have been raised about the validity of the lab’s testing results. Injustice Watch is aware of two active cases in which defendants in Lake and Will counties have been charged with the help of evidence provided by the lab.
The revelations about the lab have also brought renewed attention to the case of William Bishop, who is serving a 31-year prison sentence for murder and aggravated DUI. The DUI charges stemmed from the lab’s analysis of his blood after he caused a fatal car crash in rural McHenry County in 2020. Prosecutors argued for murder charges on the theory that Bishop was over the legal limit for THC and that his use of marijuana brought on the psychotic delusions that caused him to collide with another vehicle. Multiple psychiatrists disagreed at trial, presenting evidence of Bishop’s bipolar disorder in support of his insanity defense. Still, a judge found Bishop guilty.
Defense attorneys who have tried to bring attention to the lab’s malfeasance also welcomed the commission’s statement as a vindication. “It was nice that the commission called out UIC about what they were really trying to do: discourage litigation against them as opposed to provide an honest and independent evaluation,” said Donald Ramsell, who specializes in DUI defense and has been vocal about the problems with the UIC lab for years.
However, the commission’s recommendations carry no legal weight. The body was designed by statute to be merely advisory. Unlike similar commissions in other states, most notably Texas, the Illinois Forensic Science Commission has no authority to investigate labs, receive public complaints, or suspend analysts’ credentials.
Though the commission did not name anyone responsible for the problems at the UIC lab, its statement did indirectly reference Jennifer Bash, the lead toxicologist and quality manager at the lab, who was found by an accreditation agency to have given “inaccurate and unqualified testimony” about the meaning of lab results in at least one case.
The commission noted that other cases in which Bash may have testified in problematic ways remain unaccounted for because UIC reported it could not compile such information. An Injustice Watch public records request to UIC, however, revealed that Bash kept a log of cases in which she testified, which listed 41 cases between 2017 and 2024.
Bash, who now works as an independent scientific consultant, did not respond to a request for comment. The American Board of Forensic Toxicology confirmed its audit of her certification is ongoing. The lab’s former director, A. Karl Larsen, who is now an adjunct instructor in forensic science at Loyola University Chicago, declined to comment through his attorney.:
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
Lawyer Radha Natarajan: Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
