☰ In this section

The Champion

April 2004 , Page 6 

Search the Champion Looking for something specific?

Preview of Member Only Content

For full access: login or Become a Member Join Now

Forensic Crime Labs: Scrutinizing Results, Audits & Accreditation - Part I

By Frederic Whitehurst

Reported failures within forensic crime labs leads us to question why. The U.S. justice system’s addressing questions of guilt and innocence through discovery in an adversarial process should theoretically act as the quality assurance/quality control mechanism for forensic crime laboratories. However that QA/QC process has been found to have failed across the nation. This article, a primer for the bar, will attempt to provide some guidance toward a fairer review of forensic science. We begin with examples of recent forensic failures to create the awareness that was born in the British Royal Courts of Justice in the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division in the matter Regina v. Judith Theresa Ward. Lord Justices Glidewell, Nolan and Steyn on June 4, 1992 opined that, “For the future is it important to consider why scientists acted as they did. For lawyers, jurors and judges a forensic scientist conjures up the image of a man in a white coat working in a laboratory, approaching his task with

Want to read more?

The Champion archive is reserved for NACDL members.

NACDL members, please login to read the rest of this article.

Not a member? Join now.
Join Now
Or click here to see an overview of NACDL Member benefits.

See what NACDL members say about us.

To read the current issue of The Champion in its entirety, click here.

  • Media inquiries: Contact NACDL's Director of Public Affairs & Communications Ivan J. Dominguez at 202-465-7662 or idominguez@nacdl.org
  • Academic Requests: Full articles of The Champion Magazine are available for academic and research purposes in the WestLaw and LexisNexis databases.
Advertisement Advertise with Us

In This Section

Advertisement Advertise with Us