p. 22-33 explain the changing landscape of arson investigations and wide-scale rejection of the “negative corpus” theory that some fire investigations rely upon.
Filed by the Center for Integrity in Forensic Science, this brief explains the research demonstrating that cognitive bias in forensic analysts contributes to unreliable conclusions.
Focusing on retinal hemorrhages, this motion cites research showing no proven correlation between shaking and retinal hemorrhage, as well as studies documenting other (non-shaking) causes of retinal hemorrhage.
Overview of flaws in proposed testimony explaining how children respond in aftermath of sexual abuse
This expert report collects and describes cutting edge social science describing the problems with eyewitness identifications including: the effects of poor lighting and distance (p. 5); the effects of a quick exposure and the problem of witnesses’ overestimating the length of exposure (p. 5-6); problems with cross-racial identifications (p. 6); problem if witness previously viewed […]
Details risk factors for false confessions, benefits of a defense expert on false confessions, and why expert testimony on false confessions satisfies Daubert
Filed by the Innocence Project, this brief details research demonstrating that hair microscopy evidence does not meet the standards of reliable scientific evidence, as well as research showing how persuasive forensic testimony is to juries.
Based on forensic reports on latent fingerprint matching, this motion argues that fingerprint analysts can only accurately testify in terms of exclusion, rather than that two prints are a “match,” from a “common source,” or that any individual is “the source” of a latent fingerprint.
Testimony of defense expert on issues surrounding Shaken Baby Syndrome diagnoses
Amicus Brief – Courts should exclude “criminal profiling” and non-scientific “crime scene analysis” evidence
Summarizes research on accuracy of “criminal profiling” evidence over forty years, concluding profilers are no “better than bartenders at predicting the traits and features of offenders.” Also provides an overview of cases nationwide excluding criminal profiling evidence and finding that its major premise is faulty and essentially propensity evidence.