Contact Our Office
Office of the Public Defender
435 North Orange Avenue
Suite 400
Orlando, FL 32801
Browse the Site
Search
Accessibility
The Orange County Public Defender is committed to ensuring that persons with disabilities have access to its website. If the format of any material on our website is not accessible due to a disability, please e-mail PDADCoordinator@circuit9.org or call 407-836-4806.
Cognitive Biases in the Peer Review of Bullet and Cartridge Case Comparison Casework: A Field Study
/in Attorney, News, Patterned Evidence NewsAbstract
Objective
Forensic judgments and their peer review are often the result of human assessment and are thus subjective and prone to bias. This study examined whether bias affects forensic peer review.
Hypotheses
We hypothesized that the probability of disagreement between two forensic examiners about the proposed conclusion would be higher with “blind” peer review (reviewer saw only the first examiner’s comparison photos) than with “non-blind” peer review (reviewer also saw the first examiner’s interpretation and proposed conclusion). We also hypothesized that examiners with a higher perceived professional status would have a larger effect on the reported conclusion than examiner with a lower status.
Method
We acquired data during a non-blind and a blind peer review procedure in a naturalistic, covert study with eight examiners (3-26 years of experience). We acquired 97 conclusions of bullet and cartridge case comparisons in the blind and 471 in the non-blind peer review procedure.
Results
The odds of disagreement between examiners about the evidential strength of a comparison were approximately five times larger (95%-CI [3.06, 8.50]) in the blind than in the non-blind procedure, with disagreement about 12.5% and 42.3% of the proposed conclusions, respectively. Also, the odds that their proposed conclusion was reported as the final conclusion were approximately 2.5 higher for the higher-status examiners than for lower-status examiners.
Conclusions
Our results support both the hypothesis that bias occurs during non-blind forensic peer review and the hypothesis that higher-status examiners determine the outcome of a discussion more than lower-status examiners. We conclude that blind peer review may reduce the probability of bias and that status effects have an impact on the peer reviewing process.
Read more.
Fingerprint Analysis is High-Stakes Work—But It Doesn’t Take Much to Qualify as an Expert
/in Attorney, News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
Making Sense of Science XIII – April 2-4, 2020
/in Attorney, Biology News, Chemistry News, Crime Lab News, Digital Forensics News, Medical Trauma, News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
Burned by ‘Bad Science’ A Doctor’s Questionable Opinion Can Help Send Caregivers to Prison
/in News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
PD9 Hosts Its Annual Law Camp with the Boys and Girls Club
/in Attorney, News, Patterned Evidence NewsThis summer, Robert Wesley, Public Defender of the Ninth Circuit, partnered with Dr. Candice Bridge from the University of Central Florida (UCF) and the National Center for Forensic Science (NCFS) to provide a Forensic Science Law Camp for the Boys and Girls Clubs of Central Florida.
This law camp gave middle school and high school children an introduction to a career in forensic science. The students had the opportunity to learn how to compare fingerprints and ask for career guidance. This experience culminated in a mock trial at the end of the summer.
The Ninth Circuit for Orange and Osceola Counties, UCF, and the NCFS is committed to outreach programs like this one to help educate and make careers in Forensic Science accessible to the community.
View more photos below.
There Will Be Blood, and Physics, Too: The Messy Science of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis
/in News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
State Supreme Court Blasts Renowned Forensic Scientist Henry Lee and Throws Out 1989 Murder Convictions of Two New Milford Men
/in Attorney, Biology News, News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
The Myth of Fingerprints
/in Biology News, News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
Spring Training – March 4-8
/in Attorney, Biology News, News, Patterned Evidence NewsDownload the agenda.
Could Fingerprint Scanners Replace Check-In Lines at Airports, Baseball Games and Hospitals?
/in News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
Bloodstain Analysis Convinced a Jury She Stabbed Her 10-Year-Old Son. Now, Even Freedom Can’t Give Her Back Her Life.
/in News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
New Scientific Paper: The Uncertain Future of Forensic Science
/in News, Patterned Evidence NewsAbstract
Forensic science is at a crossroads. In the last two decades, often-used forms of pattern evidence, such as fingerprint, tool mark, and bite mark identification, have faced significant criticism for lacking adequate scientific validation or proven reliability. Is this the beginning of a sea change, signaling the rise of a science-based, empirically grounded approach to these forms of evidence, both in the courtroom and in the crime laboratory? Or has the increased attention produced Band-Aids rather than meaningful and lasting cures? This essay argues that the current state of forensic science reform is both “half empty” and “half full.” Looking first at bite mark evidence, then at modifications in the language used by forensic scientists for their courtroom testimony, and, finally, at the creation and the elimination of the National Commission on Forensic Science, this essay argues that we have thus far seen modest and meaningful – but far from adequate or transformative – reform. Our best hope for sustained, substantial changes necessary for improving forensic science evidence within our system of justice requires the creation of another national commission or other institutional body, made up of both research scientists and other institutional stakeholders, and situated as to prevent “capture” by either forensic practitioners or advocates within our adversarial system.
Mnookin, Jennifer L., The Uncertain Future of Forensic Science (December 12, 2018). 147 Daedalus 99 (Fall 2018); UCLA School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 18-42. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3300354.
2019 Making Sense of Science Seminar – April 5-6, 2019
/in Attorney, Digital Forensics News, News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more and register.
Migrant Minor is Held in Adult Detention Facility for Nearly a Year After Dental Exam Found He Was Likely 18
/in Attorney, News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
What Happened After an 11-Year-Old Boy Was Accused of Murdering His Pregnant Soon-To-Be Stepmom
/in Chemistry News, News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
Junk Arson Science Sent Claude Garrett to Prison for Murder 25 Years Ago. Will Tennessee Release Him?
/in Chemistry News, News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
Academic Paper Highlights Need to Tighten Rules for Fingerprint Evidence in Light of False-Positive Error Rate – Criminal Legal News
/in Attorney, News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
Photo by Evelyn on Unsplash.
“We the Defenders”: National Association for Public Defense Investigator and Social Worker/Sentencing Advocates Conference – November 26-29
/in Attorney, Biology News, Digital Forensics News, Medical Trauma, News, Patterned Evidence News, Toxicology News“We the Defenders”: National Association for Public Defense Investigator and Social Worker/Sentencing Advocates Conference
These conferences will feature nationally recognized faculty in a mix of plenary sessions, simultaneous sessions and small group breakouts. Participants will have the opportunity to choose sessions to best fit their individual needs. There will also be networking opportunities to create relationships to sustain the support provided during the live event.
The curriculum is being designed by two experienced planning teams working with NAPD’s Training Director Jeff Sherr.
The schedule and topics in Indianapolis will be very similar to the agenda linked below. Some of the topics offered in break out sessions will differ due to the results of a needs assessment of those who register and faculty strengths.
Click here to see the agenda and faculty for the previous conference in Denver.
Prices
Early Bird pricing before July 9
Members – $275
Non Members – $325
Between July 10 – Sept 3
Members – $325
Non Members – $375
After Sept 4
Members – $375
Non Members – $425
This conference will have a similiar structure and many of the same faculty. It will evolve as we survey registrants and make sure it fits your needs.
Confirmed presenters for Indianapolis include:
Topics will include:
Member organizations registering more than 5 people for this conference will receive a discount of $25 per registrant.
How an Unproven Forensic Science Spread Through the Criminal Justice System – ProPublica
/in News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.
Blood Will Tell – ProPublica
/in News, Patterned Evidence NewsRead more.