tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8298837746880587541.post3340256560893337938..comments2024-01-06T05:01:09.131-06:00Comments on The Defense Rests: Working blindPaul B. Kennedyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15827522954049831696noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8298837746880587541.post-71149832670555787022012-02-02T12:53:33.765-06:002012-02-02T12:53:33.765-06:00Thank you for your comments. I will probably be wr...Thank you for your comments. I will probably be writing another post based on the points you made.Paul B. Kennedyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15827522954049831696noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8298837746880587541.post-88458950893059816572012-02-02T07:31:14.046-06:002012-02-02T07:31:14.046-06:00It's hard to imagine how some forensic analyse...It's hard to imagine how some forensic analyses could be done in a totally blind fashion. For instance, in blood alcohol tests for dui the analyst will know based on the test requested, the type of sample, and the packaging of the sample that it is a blood sample from someone accused of dui. Similarly in most DNA testing. To do a criminal paternity test the analyst must know which samples came from the child, the mother, and the alleged father. In rape cases the analyst will know from the types and packaging which samples came from the rape kit, the victim, and the alleged rapist. For interpretation of mixtures where a likelihood ratio statistic must be calculated the analyst must evaluate alternative hypotheses that would explain the evidence, so the analyst must know the prosecution hypothesis of the crime which includes knowing which profile comes from the alleged perpetrator. The same for firearms analysis. The analyst will know from the item and the packaging that a bullet came from an autopsy. The analyst will know that the gun they are comparing it to was suspected of being used. Why else would the detective submit it? <br /><br />So truly blind testing is not an achievable goal.<br /><br />The better approach that is achievable is two fold:<br /><br />1) Separate labs from police agencies and district attorney offices so the staff of laboratories are not part of the prosecution team. <br /><br />2) Encourage, promote and make possible extensive review of test records and retesting of evidence by the defense so that possible errors and biases can be identified. <br /><br />The true gold standard of quality in science is not blind testing - the vast majority of scientific studies are not done in a blind fashion. The real gold standard of science is reproducibility of findings based upon retesting. <br /><br />Retesting is almost always an option when it comes to forensic analysis, and often the defense attorney can get the court to pay for it. But, for whatever reason, defense attorneys rarely request retesting, and they rarely get their own expert to review the testing results. I don't really understand that. If I were a defendant I would sure want retesting done.EBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14392265014285397561noreply@blogger.com