Question by unknown: what’s your reaction to this science article?
For decades, forensic scientists have made claims about fingerprints, ballistics, handwriting, bite marks, shoe prints and blood splatters that lack empirical grounding and have never been verified by science. This was just one conclusion of a two-year study by the National Academy of Sciences, which called for a wholesale overhaul of the crime lab system. The academy, the preeminent science adviser to the federal government, found a system in disarray, with labs that are underfunded and beholden to law enforcement, lacking independent oversight and without consistent standards. The report concludes that the deficiencies pose “a continuing and serious threat to the quality and credibility of forensic science practice.” With the notable exception of DNA evidence, the report says, many forensic methods have not consistently and reliably connected crime scene evidence to a specific individual or source. For example, the frequent claims that fingerprint analysis had a zero error rate are “not scientifically plausible,” the report says.
Answer by cantfindid69
sounds like lawyer propaganda trying to defend his ‘OJ Simpson’ client.
Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!