[Ssc-dev] When scientific evidence turns out to be wrong

[Nathan of Guardian]

https://talk.developersquare.net/t/when-scientific-evidence-turns-out-to-be-wrong/51

We've do a lot of work on using smartphone sensors as digital evidence
and proof through our InformaCam project
(https://guardianproject.info/informa). However, here's a sad case of
where the power of science was greatly exaggerated and overstated,
resulting in a tragic and unjust outcome.

FBI Admits Flawed Hair Analysis in Hundreds of Cases Spanning Decades
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/30323-fbi-admits-flawed-hair-analysis-in-hundreds-of-cases-spanning-decades

Tuesday, 21 April 2015 10:29
By Terrell Jermaine Starr, AlterNet | Report
font size decrease font size increase font size Print 
Over the course of more than two decades prior to 2000, most of the
examiners in an FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in most of the
trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants, the
Washington Post reported Sunday.

In 268 trials reviewed so far, 26 of the 28 examiners with the FBI
Laboratory's microscopic hair comparison unit overstated evidence that
favored the prosecution more than 95 percent of the time, according to
the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) and the
Innocence Project. Now the FBI and Justice Departments have formally
admitted to this grave miscarriage of justice.

The flawed testimony had devastating impacts on many of the defendants.
At least 32 were sentenced to death. Fourteen have been executed or died
in prison. Prosecutors and the affected defendants have been notified in
case there are grounds for appeals. Four defendants have already been
exonerated.

The FBI has identified roughly 2,500 cases for review in which a hair
match was made by the FBI lab. In fact hair analysis and "definitive
matches" are a lot more subjective than was claimed. The Justice
Department and FBI said in a statement that they "are committed to
ensuring that affected defendants are notified of past errors and that
justice is done in every instance. The Department and the FBI are
committed to ensuring the accuracy of future hair analysis testimony, as
well as the application of all disciplines of forensic science."

After federal authorities launched a federal investigation in 2012, FBI
experts were found to have used incomplete or misleading statistics
during testimonies in which they testified that hairs found at crime
scenes were near-certain matches to defendants. Hundreds of potentially
innocent people may have been wrongfully convicted as a result of these
testimonies from cases that date back to the 1970s.

Issues with misleading hair analysis isn't new, but the scale of the new
admissions is. In 2002, the FBI admitted that its experts reported false
hair matches more than 11 percent of the time. In Washington, DC, three
of seven defendants whose trials included flawed testimony have been
exonerated since 2009. Other courts have exonerated two other men. All
of the exonerated had served 20 to 30 years prison time on rape and
murder convictions.

As The Post reports, correcting the problem may be harder than admitting
it, since it relies on local judges and prosecutors' and defense
lawyers' willingness and cooperation:

University of Virginia law professor Brandon L. Garrett said the results
reveal a "mass disaster" inside the criminal justice system, one that it
has been unable to self-correct because courts rely on outdated
precedents admitting scientifically invalid testimony at trial and,
under the legal doctrine of finality, make it difficult for convicts to
challenge old evidence.
"The tools don't exist to handle systematic errors in our criminal
justice system," Garrett said. "The FBI deserves every recognition for
doing something really remarkable here. The problem is there may be few
judges, prosecutors or defense lawyers who are able or willing to do
anything about it."
Federal authorities are offering new DNA testing in cases with errors,
if sought by a judge or prosecutor, and agreeing to drop procedural
objections to appeals in federal cases.
However, biological evidence in the cases often is lost or unavailable.
Among states, only California and Texas specifically allow appeals when
experts recant or scientific advances undermine forensic evidence at
trial.
So far, the FBI has almost finished reviewing 350 trial testimonies and
900 lab reports and about 1,200 cases still need to be reviewed. The
bureau hasn't been able to review 700 cases because prosecutors or
police didn't respond to information requests. 
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may
not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the
source.
-- 
  Nathan of Guardian
  nathan at guardianproject.info