The first issue of Taylor and Francis' Forensic Science Policy and Management journal carries an article that confronts the argument that faulty forensics are to blame for post-conviction errors.
The article, entitled 'The Wrongful Conviction of Forensic Science', was written by John M Collins and Jay Jarvis of the Crime Lab Report.
Collins and Jarvis confront the idea that faulty forensic science is to blame for most post-conviction errors.
The authors cite multiple instances in which this sentiment has been repeated by US media outlets and some innocence advocates.
Collins said: 'Forensic science is just too important to be made the victim of blind activism.' Specifically, the authors set out to prove the inaccuracy of the widely accepted notion that 57 per cent of the 200 DNA-based exonerations that occurred between 1989 and 2007 resulted from misconduct in forensic science.
Through their study of the 200 individual cases, Collins and Jarvis find that less than 11 per cent of the overturned convictions resulted from forensic science malpractice.
They go on to find that in 18 per cent of the cases, forensic evidence actually favoured the defendant.
Collins said: 'It is ironic that activists who claim to champion the protection of the innocent would vilify a profession that has such a positive impact on our criminal justice system.' In addition to defending forensic science, Collins and Jarvis also identify causes of wrongful conviction that they believe the media and activists have ignored, including false eyewitness identification, government misconduct, and bad legal representation.
The authors present a compelling and thoroughly researched defence of forensic science.
Collins added: 'Our research will have great value to anyone who wants to know the real story about forensic science and wrongful convictions.
'Forensic science is the hero, not the villain.'
