Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

Re:Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA t... by dragonwriter on Monday February 08, 2021 @08:07PM (#26072610)

> Validating scientific methods and validating a program is different in that the program is proprietary and the science (usually) merely behind a paywall.

Or completely fictitious.

Have you heard the story about the FBI crime lab and the “science” of fiber analysis that they developed, and not only used in federal criminal trials but also provided as a service for state and local agencies for decades?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA t... by ArnoVW on Tuesday February 09, 2021 @03:41AM (#26075206)

Or the Shirley McKie debacle in Scotland in 2005, where it turned out that finger print detection was more of an 'art' than a science. The ball got rolling once they started convicting police officers (so at least the analysis was double-blind?)

Or the phantom of Heilbronn, where dozens of crimes were linked to a single woman. Who turned out to be the lab technician that assembled the kits. Doubts started once they discovered the caucasian female DNA in cells of the charred remains of a black male.

I often wonder how prosecuters defend against the use of these cases to create doubt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_McKie

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_Heilbronn

[ Parent | on HN ]