Journal article

Finding the way forward for forensic science in the US-A commentary on the PCAST report.

  • Evett IW Principal Forensic Services Ltd., 34 Southborough Road, Bickley, Bromley, Kent, BR1 2EB, United Kingdom. Electronic address: ianevett@btinternet.com.
  • Berger CEH Institute for Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Law, Leiden University, PO Box 9520, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands.
  • Buckleton JS Environmental Science & Research Ltd, Private Bag 92021, Auckland 1142, New Zealand; Department of Statistical Genetics, University of Washington, Box 357232 Seattle, WA 98195-7232, United States.
  • Champod C Ecole des Sciences Criminelles, Faculty of Law, Criminal Justice and Public Administration, Université de Lausanne, Batochime - quartier Sorge, CH-1015 Lausanne-Dorigny, Switzerland.
  • Jackson G Abertay University, Dundee, DD1 1HG, United Kingdom.
  • 2017-07-09
Published in:
  • Forensic science international. - 2017
English A recent report by the US President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), (2016) has made a number of recommendations for the future development of forensic science. Whereas we all agree that there is much need for change, we find that the PCAST report recommendations are founded on serious misunderstandings. We explain the traditional forensic paradigms of match and identification and the more recent foundation of the logical approach to evidence evaluation. This forms the groundwork for exposing many sources of confusion in the PCAST report. We explain how the notion of treating the scientist as a black box and the assignment of evidential weight through error rates is overly restrictive and misconceived. Our own view sees inferential logic, the development of calibrated knowledge and understanding of scientists as the core of the advance of the profession.
Language
  • English
Open access status
green
Identifiers
Persistent URL
https://sonar.rero.ch/global/documents/265243
Statistics

Document views: 30 File downloads:
  • Full-text: 0