Breaking NEWz you can UzE...
compiled by Jon Stimac
Challenge To Ministers Over McKie
SCOTSMAN, UK - May 28, 2006 ...a "failure of duty"
accusation for refusing to disclose all they know about the McKie
MSP Urges Closure of Fingerprint Bureau
May 26, 2006 ...an MSP has called for the
closure of the Glasgow fingerprints bureau of the SCRO...
Five Cases in Which SCRO Evidence Has Been in Doubt
- May 26, 2006
...there have been five contested print identifications
by the SCRO in the past decade...
McKie in Angry Clashes with MSPs Over Print Questions
SCOTSMAN, UK- May 24, 2006 ...McKie angrily accused MSPs of
putting her on trial again...
Recent CLPEX Posting Activity
containing new posts
Moderated by Steve Everist
There they go again.
Pat A. Wertheim Mon May 29, 2006 6:33 pm
Kathy Saviers Sun May 28, 2006 8:51 pm
txlegal Sun May 28, 2006 5:52 pm
Footwear and Digital Photography
Kelly Zirngibl Sun May 28, 2006 8:17 am
DNA McKie Case
EmmaC Sat May 27, 2006 9:21 am
Identification by Concensus
Pat A. Wertheim Sat May 27, 2006 2:19 am
Journal Articles - McKie case
EmmaC Thu May 25, 2006 9:06 pm
McKie 'MURDER HOUSE'
flying monkey Thu May 25, 2006 12:38 am
ABFDE Daubert form posted
Jan Seaman Kelly Wed May 24, 2006 4:27 pm
Forensic Science Degrees
EmmaC Wed May 24, 2006 11:15 am
Latent prints on deceased bodies
Danny L. Harness Tue May 23, 2006 7:43 pm
esmaltz Tue May 23, 2006 2:57 pm
Wayne Reutzel Mon May 22, 2006 6:22 pm
II2None59 Mon May 22, 2006 4:06 pm
UPDATES ON CLPEX.com
No major updates on the website this week.
Clifton Bishop provided a look at the Forensic
and Investigative Science Program
West Virginia University in Morgantown, WV
we link to the National Academy of Sciences
Colloquium on Forensic Science and the Law to experience multimedia
Forensic Science: The Nexus
of Science and the Law
National Academy of Sciences
Organized by Stephen E. Fienberg, Margaret A. Berger, David Donoho, Donald
Kennedy, Roger Kahn, and Douglas H. Ubelaker
Held November 16-18, 2005
The Sackler Colloquium on Forensic Science: The Nexus of Science and
the Law was held on November 16-18, 2005. This Colloquium reviewed
the science in forensic science from multiple perspectives: the perspective
of government forensic laboratories, the basic science underlying forensic
technologies, and, of course, from the perspective of the courts, which
ultimately must judge what scientific evidence should be admitted.
The Supreme Court's Daubert standard has generated some ambiguity for the
legal community, but the Court did list several criteria for qualifying
expert testimony: peer review, error rate, adequate testing, regular
standards and techniques, and general acceptance. The controversy over a
recent federal court ruling on fingerprint evidence has reignited some old
challenges to "forensic science."
The Colloquium used the term "forensic science" to mean the use of science
evidence in legal evidentiary contexts. This is a far broader definition
than that adopted by "forensic" practitioners, but much of the focus is
nonetheless on traditional forensic tools, those that are gaining currency,
and those that might in the future. The criminal justice system and the
courts in particular, are slow to adopt new scientific procedures. The
acceptance of DNA evidence and the standardization of laboratory procedures
for DNA analysis eventually broke through that barrier, well after there was
scientific proof of their reliability. But there were numerous questions
that had to be answered about using DNA evidence in a forensic context that
never had to be considered by scientists engaged in DNA research, issues
such as contamination, degradation, and a number of statistical issues. Two
NRC Committees issued reports on the topic and they raised issues such as
the uniqueness of an individual DNA profile, sample consumption, and a
defendant's right to retesting. Some of these questions turned out to cause
no problems, but they had to be asked and answered, and most of the courts,
considering what a revolutionary form of evidence this was, responded fairly
quickly. At issue now is the reliability of other forensic science methods
as well as how the courts should respond to novel scientific evidence.
The Arthur M. Sackler Colloquia of the National Academy of Sciences address
scientific topics of broad and current interest, cutting across the
boundaries of traditional disciplines. Each year, four to six such colloquia
are scheduled, typically two days in length and international in scope.
Colloquia are organized by a member of the Academy, often with the
assistance of an organizing committee, and feature presentations by leading
scientists in the field and discussions with a hundred or more researchers
with an interest in the topic. These colloquia are made possible by a
generous gift from Jill Sackler, in memory of her husband,
Arthur M. Sackler.
Instead of transcribing a lecture, this week I encourage you to
and review the forensic related presentations from the November 2005 "Sackler
Colloquia". The slide shows appear on your screen as the actual audio
of the presenter walks you through the presentations. Pick a topic of
interest and attend the lecture!
On the right you will see "Forensic Science"
Or visit the main forensic page at:
Feel free to pass The Detail along to other
examiners. This is a free newsletter FOR latent print examiners, BY latent
print examiners. There are no copyrights on The Detail, and the website is open
for all to visit.
If you have not yet signed up to receive the Weekly Detail in YOUR e-mail inbox,
go ahead and join the list now
so you don't miss out! (To join this free e-mail newsletter, enter your
name and e-mail address on the following page:
You will be sent a
Confirmation e-mail... just click on the link in that e-mail, or paste it
into an Internet Explorer address bar, and you are
signed up!) If you have
problems receiving the Detail from a work e-mail address, there have been past
issues with department e-mail filters considering the Detail as potential
unsolicited e-mail. Try subscribing from a home e-mail address or contact
your IT department to allow e-mails from Topica. Members may
unsubscribe at any time. If you have difficulties with the sign-up process
or have been inadvertently removed from the list, e-mail me personally at
email@example.com and I will try
to work things out.
Until next Monday morning, don't work too hard or too little.
Have a GREAT week!