So DNA is objective?
DNA is widely perceived as objective scientific evidence in criminal trials and thereby being perceived by jurors are compelling evidence. If only!
Of course, it may depend on your definition of ‘objective’. It should mean, independent of the observer, meaning that any two (reasonable) people would come to the same conclusion about the same observation. An objective measure would be incapable of any other sensible result.
Does DNA evidence fit this definition?
Read article on this topic
Back to top
TFI's 10
The Forensic Institute celebrate our involvement in casework for 10 years in 2012. In that time we have had a considerable impact on the use of scientific and medical evidence in Courts across the world. Our involvement in high profile and landmark cases such as the inquest into the death of HRH Diana, Princess of Wales, the Omagh Bomb (R v Hoey – LCN DNA), R v T (footwearmarks), Reed & Reed (LCN), Weller (transfer of DNA), and shaken baby cases such as Holdsworth and Wise, have achieved and maintained our reputation for challenge in difficult and complex cases. Work in the USA, New Zealand, South Africa, Australia, Egypt, and Turkey, and Professor Jamieson’s position as Editor in Chief of the world’s largest Encyclopaedia of Forensic Science maintain our international presence.
more >>
Back to top
New York, New York
All of TFI’s staff are now accredited experts for the Assigned Counsel Plan Expert Roster for the City of New York. All experts on the roster have met the Assigned Counsel Plan’s requirements, including the new requirement that all experts undergo the background review and credentials verifications. Already, we are involved in several cases involving DNA reports produced by the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner using a low template DNA technique.
Back to top
Footwear marks and the LR; R v T
This Appeal case involved, “The extent to which evaluative expert evidence on footwear marks is reliable and the way in which it was put before the jury. … The appeal raised an issue of some importance in relation to the use of likelihood ratios in the provision of an evaluative opinion where the statistical data available were uncertain and incomplete.” It has important repercussions for a number of issues including policy and practice in UK forensic science.
A full commentary on this important case.
Back to top
|
