This second episode of the forensic advancement season of the National Institute of Justice's (NIJ's) Just Science podcast series is an interview with Dr. Cecelia Crouse, formerly the Crime Laboratory Director of the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, regarding the 20009 National Academy of Sciences' report.
The National Academy of Sciences' 2009 report on the forensic sciences examined and critiqued the scientific basis for decisionmaking by forensic scientists. The report focused on the human factor of bias and subjectivity that corrupts the reliability and accuracy of forensic conclusions that determine court outcomes. The interview with Dr. Crouse focuses on what can be done by the forensic science community to address the issues discussed in the report. The importance of recognizing the human factors that have the potential for bias and inaccuracy in forensic science decisionmaking is acknowledged and discussed in the interview, along with what can be done to identify and minimize mistakes in procedures and decisionmaking in forensic science. Some of the issues discussed are educational requirements, training, accreditation, certification, standardization, and transparency.
Downloads
Similar Publications
- Testing the Invariance of Warrior and Guardian Orientations on the Prioritization of Procedural Justice: Do Officer Demographics Matter?
- Recovery and Detection of Ignitable Liquid Residues from the Substrates by Solid Phase Microextraction – Direct Analysis in Real Time Mass Spectrometry
- The St. Louis Police Partnership: An Individualized Focused Deterrence Implementation Guide