re: #313 Tigger2005

Yeah, you just hope the sensible reaction will prevail and they will insist on tougher standards (after all the appeals are going to cost them more than if they just did the science right in the first place).Science is still a fantastic tool for helping determine a person’s guilt or innocence.

That would be true if they actually used science. Instead they use BS like “bite marks”..

Crime labs need major overhaul, study finds
articles.cnn.com

In its report published Wednesday, the academy showed there is a serious lack of uniform standards, training and oversight. And, with the exception of DNA technology, the report concludes experts often overstate how much can be determined by forensic techniques running the gamut from fingerprinting to bite mark and hair analysis.
…..
The panel recommends that Congress create an independent National Institute of Forensic Science that could formulate standards for various forensic disciplines, regulate training and accreditation, and lead research. Another recommendation is that crime labs should be autonomous and not controlled by police departments or prosecutors’ offices to head off any real or perceived bias toward law enforcement.

The bolded part is the biggest problem, IMO. Crime labs shouldn’t be an arm of the prosecution.