Defense lawyers have long questioned the reliability of some forensic science methods, but over the past decade, the debate has intensified. Two highly critical reports found that with the exception of DNA, many methods have not been tested rigorously enough to be considered scientifically valid.

A look at various forensic methods coming under fire and what the 2016 report from the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology had to say about them:

———

BITE MARKS

Involves examining marks left on a victim or object, then comparing those with dental impressions taken from a suspect. Only a few empirical studies have been done to study the ability of examiners to accurately identify the source of a bite mark; those found false positive rates were so high that the

Read More At Article Source | Article Attribution