A cultural change to enable improved decision-making in forensic science: A six phased approach

There has been an increased engagement by researchers in understanding the decision-making processes that occur within forensic science. There is a rapidly growing evidence base underpinning our understanding of decision-making and human factors and this body of work is the foundation for achieving truly improved decision-making in forensic science. Such an endeavour is necessary to minimise the misinterpretation of scientific evidence and maximize the effectiveness of crime reconstruction approaches and their application within the criminal justice system. This paper proposes and outlines a novel six phased approach for how a broadening and deepening knowledge of decision-making in forensic science can be articulated and incorporated into the spheres of research, practice, education, and policy making within forensic science specifically, and the criminal justice system more generally. Phases 1 and 2 set out the importance of systematic examination of the decisions which play a role throughout forensic reconstruction and legal processes. Phase 3 focuses on how these decisions can, and should, be studied to understand the underlying mechanisms and contribute to reducing the occurrence of misleading decisions. Phase 4 highlights the ways in which the results and implications of this research should be communicated to the forensic community and wider criminal justice system. Lastly, the way in which the forensic science domain can move forwards in managing the challenges of human decision-making and create and embed a culture of acceptance and transparency in research, practice and education (learning and training) are presented in phases 5 and 6. A consideration of all 6 connected phases offers a pathway for a holistic approach to improving the transparency and reproducibility of decision making within forensic science.     

The forensic examination of structural fires in Victoria,Australia: Decision-making processes and impact on judicial outcomes

There is a body of published research that has evaluated the contribution of forensic science to the criminal justice system, but many disciplines of forensic science remain unexplored in this regard. The aim of this study was to examine the contribution that forensic fire examination services provide to criminal investigations and court processes in arson cases. Forensic fire examination services differ in a number of ways to the disciplines covered in previous research on the impact of forensic evidence on justice outcomes. Forensic fire examinations involve a combination of scene examination and laboratory analyses, and the results can provide critical evidence of whether an incident that has occurred is a criminal offence (i.e. whether a fire has occurred as the result of an act of arson). Forensic fire examination is also a discipline that has faced challenges and undergone development in recent decades regarding its scientific basis and the issue of contextual bias. In this study, data were collated for 273 structural fires that were examined by the forensic fire services in Victoria, Australia. In this jurisdiction, scene and laboratory forensic services are delivered within short time frames with a focus on providing impartial scientific and investigative services to assist criminal investigations conducted by police. The current dataset was highly skewed in terms of criminal justice outcomes and was not suitable for conducting the planned statistical analyses. Nonetheless, the pattern of findings obtained suggested that the inclusion of forensic evidence which supported the prosecution of arson may be associated with an increased likelihood of suspects being charged and defendants found guilty. Examination of the decision-making process of the forensic fire examiners has provided insight into the variety of evidence that is considered by forensic experts in reaching the important conclusion about the origin and cause of structural fires.     

Of earprints, fingerprints, scent dogs, cot deaths and cognitive contamination--a brief look at the present state of play in the forensic arena

Over the last decades, the importance of technical and scientific evidence for the criminal justice system has been steadily increasing. Unfortunately, the weight of forensic evidence is not always easy for the trier of fact to assess, as appears from a brief discussion of some recent cases in which the weight of expert evidence was either grossly over- or understated. Also, in recent years, questions surrounding the value of forensic evidence have played a major role in the appeal and revision stages of a number of highly publicized criminal cases in several countries, including the UK and the Netherlands. Some of the present confusion is caused by the different ways in which conclusions are formulated by experts working within the traditional approach to forensic identification, as exemplified by (1) dactyloscopy and (2) the other traditional forensic identification disciplines like handwriting analysis, firearms analysis and fibre analysis, as opposed to those working within the modern scientific approach used in forensic DNA analysis. Though most clearly expressed in the way conclusions are formulated within the diverse fields, these differences essentially reflect the scientific paradigms underlying the various identification disciplines. The types of conclusions typically formulated by practitioners of the traditional identification disciplines are seen to be directly related to the two major principles underpinning traditional identification science, i.e. the uniqueness assumption and the individualization principle. The latter of these is shown to be particularly problematic, especially when carried to its extreme, as embodied in the positivity doctrine, which is almost universally embraced by the dactyloscopy profession and allows categorical identification only. Apart from issues arising out of the interpretation of otherwise valid expert evidence there is growing concern over the validity and reliability of the expert evidence submitted to courts. While in various countries including the USA, Canada and the Netherlands criteria have been introduced which may be used as a form of input or output control on expert evidence, in England and Wales expert evidence is much less likely to be subject to forms of admissibility or reliability testing. Finally, a number of measures are proposed which may go some way to address some of the present concerns over the evaluation of technical and scientific evidence.     

Forensic science and criminal justice: An analysis of curricular models

The multi-disciplinary field of forensic science frequently finds its academic home within criminal justice programs. After examining the reasons for this academic linkage, an analysis of criminal justice curricular models and courses was undertaken to assess their applicability to forensic science education and careers. The authors concluded that the relationship between criminal justice and forensic science can be mutually beneficial; however, most criminal justice programs do not provide adequate preparation for meaningful careers in forensic science.     

Peer‐Reviewed Forensic Consultation in Practice: Multidisciplinary Oversight in Common Expertise

The fallibility of forensic science consultation is an ongoing and major justice concern. Prospective peer‐reviewed forensic consultation has over 10 years of application in American criminal and civil courts, adapting from the traditional oversight of teaching hospitals, rules of evidence and discovery, conventions of testimony of expert witnesses, and attorneys' overall trial strategy. In systematizing heightened oversight, this process ensures greater accountability in forensic science consultation. The integration of peer reviewers' complementary expertise and experience enhances the sophistication and overall quality of assessment. Forensic examination frequently involves the interface of different specialties. Multidisciplinary peer review augments expert proficiency with that of professional peers having different vantage points from relevant scientific disciplines. This approach ensures greater sophistication of a case inquiry, built‐in accountability, and streamlined processes when multiple experts are necessitated. Here, the authors present examples of several cases and the primary and secondary benefits of this collaborative, rigorous, cross‐disciplinary exercise.     

The barriers to achieving an evidence base for bitemark analysis

Forensic dentistry is the union of two scientific disciplines, both of which are undergoing a renewed scientific rigor. In forensic science the advent of the Daubert ruling has required that judges assess the forensic value of 'expert testimony' ensuring that techniques, methodologies and practices are not only commonly accepted (as was the previous hurdle during the Frye era) but that error rates, assessment of reliability and validation studies are published to support their use. This new degree of judicial scrutiny has been mirrored in the field of dentistry itself, where organisations search and summarise randomised controlled trials in order to recommend best practice and devise clinical care pathways that are firmly grounded in proven scientific research. Despite the obvious drive from both of these professions, forensic dentistry, and in particular the sub-discipline of bitemark analysis, has been remarkably slow to address the obvious deficiencies in the evidence base that underpins this element of forensic science. Reviews of the literature reveal that the vast majority of published works are case reports, and very little primary literature exists. This paper reviews those studies that have assessed aspects of bitemark analysis including the crucial issue of the uniqueness of the human dentition; the application of transparent overlays and the application of statistical probabilities in bitemark conclusions. There are numerous barriers to undertaking high quality research in the field of bitemark analysis, the most important of which is the use of a gold-standard that is acceptable both in terms of diagnostic research but is also forensically relevant. If bitemark analysis is to continue to play a role in the judicial process then there is an urgent need for high quality studies that meet the levels of forensic and scientific scrutiny applied to other disciplines within the criminal justice system. Studies are required to determine not that the human dentition is unique, but how this asserted uniqueness is represented on human skin and other substrates. The error rates associated with the analysis of bitemarks are required on a procedural level as well as an individual practitioner basis and scales and interpretative indices of bitemark severity and forensic significance should be validated and introduced into common use.     

对《关于司法鉴定管理问题的决定》未涉及的司法鉴定启动权改革若干建议——以刑事诉讼为视角

全国人大常委会《关于司法鉴定管理问题的决定》主要规范的是司法鉴定管理体制问题,对于刑事诉讼制度中司法鉴定启动权配置的问题仍然未有明确的规定。在《决定》出台后刑事诉讼中仍存在的司法鉴定启动权配置的问题和弊端的基础上,对刑事诉讼中司法鉴定启动权改革进行一定的完善。     

完善司法鉴定制度是科学证据时代的呼唤

司法鉴定是现代司法证明活动中查明案件事实的一种重要方法和手段.现代司法鉴定是司法证明方法进步的结果和体现.科学技术的进步使司法证明方法发生了两次重大的转变.以物证及其相关的鉴定结论等证据构成的"科学证据",应该成为司法证明最主要的手段.物证虽然是客观实在的,但其自身不能直接证明案件事实,需要人们的认识.司法鉴定是人们认识物证的途径.司法鉴定水平的提高可以帮助发现更多潜在的证据.科学技术是司法鉴定的生命.科学技术的进步是促进司法鉴定发展的最重要因素.司法鉴定制度改革应与审判体制改革相适应.司法鉴定制度改革应与证据法律制度相协调,既要赋予法官对鉴定结论的自由裁量权,又要对司法鉴定制度进行规范.司法鉴定制度改革应以提供"科学证据"为出发点,需要鉴定人出庭、技术方法标准化和建立行业协会等措施.     

英国法庭科学服务部的市场化变迁及其启示

英国法庭科学服务部市场化发展历史体现出竞争性市场有利于提升效率和为买方节约成本，这说明纯公益性刑事司法服务的某些法庭科学服务项目是可以市场化的；但其最终因超高的营运成本被迫关闭也说明商品化的服务市场承载不了法庭科学全面发展所需要的科学性要求。英国采用价格竞争的方式将法庭科学服务市场化，相比之下，真正的竞争性在中国当前的司法鉴定制度下却不存在，对司法鉴定制度进行改革已经刻不容缓。     

“CSI效应”对香港华人群体的科学证据感知评估

电视是向公众传递信息的强大媒介。最近,法庭科学和刑事司法相关题材内容在各种媒体激增,伴随着公众对法庭证据的期望提高,"CSI效应"(犯罪现场调查影视剧效应)应运而生。本研究对CSI效应的探讨有两个方面的贡献。第一,验证了在香港中国人群中是否存在CSI效应。第二,采用模拟陪审团模式,从实证角度出发全面考察CSI效应。研究发现,尽管涉及法庭科学证据的媒体报道数量确实在某种程度上影响了参与者对法庭证据的感知,但这种感知并不影响参与者对法律的判断。法庭科学题材影视剧的观众在控方仅出示法庭证据时不可能判定被告有罪,在仅出示证词时也不可能判定被告有罪。当提交法庭证据时,唯一判定被告有罪的重要预测因素是参与者对科学证据可靠性的评价。本研究的结果表明在香港不存在CSI效应。     

Evaluation of competency to stand trial in defendants who do not want to be defended against the crimes charged

Implicit but significant assumptions made in the criminal justice system include beliefs that criminals do not commit crimes to be tried and convicted and that, once arrested, defendants' primary motives are to avoid or minimize the legal consequences of the charges they face. When those assumptions are not correct, clinicians and legal decision makers are faced with difficult tasks. The authors present three cases of defendants who were not primarily concerned with defending themselves against the charges they faced, but rather with using the criminal justice procedures to further personal goals, and discuss the problems involved for forensic evaluators and courts.     

No Offense! On the Offense Principle and Some New Challenges

A central aim within criminal justice ethics is to give a plausible justification concerning which type of acts ought to be criminalized by the state. One of the principles of criminalization which has been presented and critically discussed in the philosophical literature is the Offense Principle. The primary aim of this paper is to argue that unless a rather special and implausible objective list theory of well-being is accepted, the Offense Principle should be subsumed in the Harm Principle.     

Effective use of forensic science in volume crime investigations: Identifying recurring themes in the literature

New scientific, technological and legal developments, particularly the introduction of national databases for DNA and fingerprints, have led to increased use of forensic science in the investigation of crime. There is an assumption, and in some instances specific assertions, that such developments bring improvements either in broad criminal justice terms or more narrowly in terms of economic or practical efficiencies. The underlying presumption is that the new technological opportunities will be understood and effectively implemented. This research investigates whether such increases in activity have also been accompanied by improvements in the effective use of forensic science. A systematic review of thirty-six reports published (predominantly in England and Wales) since the 1980s, which have considered the use of forensic science in the investigation of volume crimes, was carried out. These reports have identified a number of recurrent themes that influenced how effectively forensic science was used in investigations. The themes identified included forensic knowledge and training of investigators, communication and information exchange between specialists and investigators, timeliness of forensic results, interagency relationships and deployment of crime scene examiner resources. The research findings suggest that these factors continue to hinder the effective use of forensic science despite technological advances and this paper considers their potential causes.     

论刑事诉讼中鉴定意见的可靠性、可信性——基于权利保障视角的分析

司法实践中时有发生的轰动案件引发人们对于鉴定意见可靠性、可信性问题的思考。作为证据制度的司法鉴定是刑事司法公正的基础和保障，必须符合客观可靠、公正可信的基本要求。而有关保障鉴定意见可靠性和可信性基本要求的证据规则却在修改后的刑事程序中依旧缺失，因此，刑事司法鉴定制度的后续立法应当完成从注重职权便利的需要到重视权利保障的转变。     

The Impact of DNA Exonerations on the Criminal Justice System

One obvious result of DNA exonerations has been the enactment of legislation regulating postconviction DNA testing. But the impact on our criminal justice system goes beyond formal statutory change. The DNA exonerations are changing attitudes towards the death penalty, are focusing attention on how forensic laboratories operate, and are leading to the stricter scrutiny of forensic science.     

Interdisciplinary approaches to the teaching of forensic science in the Forensic Science Undergraduate Program of the National Autonomous University of Mexico,before and after COVID-19

In 2013, the Forensic Science Undergraduate Program (FSUP) at the National Autonomous University of Mexico was created in response to an alarming criminal situation in Mexico, as well as to the radical reform of its criminal justice system. Its mission is to educate and train ethical, critical, and humanistic forensic scientists capable of conducting inquiries that meet scientific quality standards and assist the justice system in firmly linking legal rulings to the available evidence. At the time, it was the first such program in the country, and the contributions that interdisciplinary forensic scientists could make to criminal investigations were largely unknown among forensic and legal practitioners. During its existence, providing an interdisciplinary, competence-based education to students has been one of the main challenges. To overcome it, teaching and assessment approaches—centered on the achievement of specifically forensic competencies as learning outcomes and the integration of forensic disciplines towards the resolution of simulated cases—have been devised to help develop the professional skill set expected of graduates. The COVID-19 pandemic led to adapting these approaches to distance or hybrid modes of learning, increasing their versatility and enriching the pedagogic repertoire of the FSUP. Currently, the main impact of the program lies in the successful incorporation of some of its graduates to agencies belonging to or related to the criminal justice system, such as the National Prosecutor’s Office, the Commission for Truth and Justice for the Ayotzinapa Case, and the National Commission for the Search of Missing and Disappeared Persons, among others.     

刑事一体化视野中的犯罪心理学

刑事一体化是指刑事立法、刑事司法、刑事科学三方面及其内部各方协调一致,形成有机统二的完整系统。在刑事一体化的视野中,犯罪心理学在关于“犯罪”这一基本概念上,应当与处于规范地位的刑法学保持一致。犯罪心理学是刑事科学的基础理论学科和应用学科,同时,由于其独特的学科性质、研究视觉和研究方法,使其在一体化的刑事科学中,具有不可替代的地位和作用。     

Criminal justice policy and the psychology of peacemaking

Psychology which once was a primary influence on the development of criminal justice policy has, in recent decades, lost much of its ability to inform how laws and policies are made that concern punishment and social control. The reason for psychology's loss of inluence can be traced to the war on crime political rhetoric adopted by politicians and criminal justice administrators. This paper argues that an emerging peacemaking perspective in the criminal justice system allows the discipline of psychology to once again inform the discourse on criminal justice policy. Issues such as drug abuse, gun control, and capital punishment are appropriate subjects for a psychological perspective in the national debate on criminal justice policy.     

Scientific standards for studies in forensic genetics

Forensic molecular genetics has evolved from a rapidly developing field with changing technologies into a highly recognized and generally accepted forensic science, leading to the establishment of national DNA databases with DNA profiles from suspects and convicted offenders. DNA evidence has taken a central role by carrying a significant weight for convictions, as well as by excluding innocent suspects early on in a criminal investigation. Due to this impact on the criminal justice system, guidelines for research in forensic genetics have been introduced already since many years. The most important issues regarding the selection and definition of typing systems both for paternity testing and for forensic identification, the criteria for technical and biostatistical validation, as well as the use of mitochondrial DNA analysis are summarized and discussed.     

The penology of racial innocence: the erasure of racism in the study and practice of punishment

In post–civil rights America, the ascendance of “law-and-order” politics and “postracial” ideology have given rise to what we call the penology of racial innocence. The penology of racial innocence is a framework for assessing the role of race in penal policies and institutions, one that begins with the presumption that criminal justice is innocent of racial power until proven otherwise. Countervailing sociolegal changes render this framework particularly problematic. On the one hand, the definition of racism has contracted in antidiscrimination law and in many social scientific studies of criminal justice, so that racism is defined narrowly as intentional and causally discrete harm. On the other hand, criminal justice institutions have expanded to affect historically unprecedented numbers of people of color, with penal policies broadening in ways that render the identification of racial intent and causation especially difficult. Analyses employing the penology of racial innocence examine the ever-expanding criminal justice system with limited definitions of racism, ultimately contributing to the erasure of racial power. Both racism and criminal justice operate in systemic and serpentine ways; our conceptual tools and methods, therefore, need to be equally systemic and capacious.