A  Report issued by that National Academies of Science found that evidence without proper scientific basis – also known as junk science — is routinely admitted in courts across the country in criminal prosecutions.  With the exception of nuclear DNA analysis, the report found that the evidence to support the reliability of many techniques is simply lacking.

This Report has profound implications for any case which the government seeks to introduce the testimony of an expert witness, including drug cases, sex offenses, and computer crimes, and provides a basis to challenge the admissibility of such evidence.  The Report also illustrates the importance of hiring an attorney who is knowledgeable of cutting edge forensic techniques which may be critical to the success of your case.

A stark example of the profound implications of junk science can be seen in the case of Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed in 2004 by the State of Texas for setting a fire which killed his three kids. In a scathing report, the forensic expert hired by Texas’ own government commission formed to re-investigate the Willingham case and others found that the investigator in Willingham’s case had no scientific basis to conclude that arson had been committed, relied on discredited folklore to reach conclusions, “in an approach that was more characteristic of mystics or psychics.”

Several other renowned arson investigators have publicly echoed this conclusion, and it now appears that an innocent man was executed for nothing more than a horrific accident.

You can view the entire Report here: STRENGTHENING FORENSIC SCIENCE IN THE UNITED STATES: A PATH FORWARD.