Models for laboratory oversight (Gabe Oberfield, Innocence Project)

The role of forensic science in America’s courtrooms has steadily increased since the first forensics labs opened in the United States in the early 20th century. But while forensic science has a reputation for producing accurate and objective evidence, it is not flawless.

In fact, of the first 200 exonerations from post-conviction DNA testing, forensic errors played a role in more than half of the wrongful convictions.

Much forensic analysis involves a degree of subjectivity requiring the analyst to make interpretations and judgment calls that can lead to inadvertent human error. In addition, carelessness in handling or analyzing evidence and outright misconduct produces questionable results.

§ 9.1-1113. Functions of the Virginia Scientific Advisory Committee.

A. The Committee may review laboratory operations of the Department and make recommendations concerning the quality and timeliness of services furnished to user agencies.

B. The Committee shall review and make recommendations as necessary to the Director of the Department and the Forensic Science Board concerning:

1. New scientific programs, protocols, and methods of testing;

2. Plans for the implementation of new programs, sustaining existing programs and improving upon them where possible, and the elimination of programs no longer needed;

3. Protocols for testing and examination methods, and guidelines for the presentation of results in court; and

4. Qualification standards for the various scientists of the Department, including the Director.

C. Upon request of the Director of the Department, the Forensic Science Board, or the Governor, the Committee shall review analytical work, reports, and conclusions of scientists employed by the Department. The Committee shall recommend to the Forensic Science Board a review process for the Department to use in instances where there has been an allegation of misidentification or other testing error made by the Department during its examination of evidence.

(2005, cc. 868, 881.)

Materials

The Innocence Project's policy does not allow the posting of the presentation

CM Cooley. Reforming the forensic community to avert the ultimate injustice. Stanford Law and Policy Review. 2004;15(318).

The Justice Project. Improving the practice and use of forensic science: A policy review. 2008.

R Teichroeb. Oversight of crime-lab staff has often been lax. Seattle Post-Intelligencer. July 23, 2004.