Questioning forensics

In the last posting, we saw how an error in DNA analysis can muddy a criminal investigation. But, forensic errors can yield graver consequences, such as a wrongful conviction.

During April 2012, The Washington Post reported that Justice Department officials had known for years about flawed forensic work that might have led to the convictions of potentially innocent people, and that the DOJ had not performed a thorough review of the cases. The Post declared that hair and fiber analyses were subjective and lacked grounding in solid research, and that examiners overstated the significance of a match.

On July 13, the newspaper announced that the DOJ and the FBI launched a review of thousands of criminal cases. The objective is to decide if any defendants were wrongly convicted because of flawed forensic evidence.

The FBI’s post-conviction review will include cases with forensics performed by all FBI Laboratory hair and fiber examiners since at least 1985. These examinations were conducted for both federal and local investigations.

The Washington Post’s story, “Justice Dept., FBI to review use of forensic evidence in thousands of cases,” includes links to articles about the reliability of various types of forensic analysis.