- Messages
- 17,471
- Reactions
- 36,484
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-fbi-keeps-pushing-junk-science-to-win-convictions
"For years, forensic firearms analysts have claimed the ability to examine the marks on a bullet found at a crime scene and match it to the gun that fired it—to the exclusion of all other guns. It can be powerfully persuasive to juries. But over the last decade or so, some scientists have cast doubt on the claim."
" A year later, the agency conceded there's no scientific evidence to support "comparative bullet lead analysis," a subfield of forensics based on the premise that each batch of bullets has a unique chemical signature. For years, analysts had cited this theory to claim that a bullet found at a crime scene could only have come from, say, a box of bullets found in a suspect's home. It just wasn't true."
see also:
"For years, forensic firearms analysts have claimed the ability to examine the marks on a bullet found at a crime scene and match it to the gun that fired it—to the exclusion of all other guns. It can be powerfully persuasive to juries. But over the last decade or so, some scientists have cast doubt on the claim."
" A year later, the agency conceded there's no scientific evidence to support "comparative bullet lead analysis," a subfield of forensics based on the premise that each batch of bullets has a unique chemical signature. For years, analysts had cited this theory to claim that a bullet found at a crime scene could only have come from, say, a box of bullets found in a suspect's home. It just wasn't true."
see also:
Popular Mechanics: The Shaky Science Behind Forensics
Read this article a few years ago and found it very interesting. Came up in conversation today. Thought some others here might find it interesting as well. CSI Myths: The Shaky Science Behind Forensics - Popular Mechanics CSI Myths: The Shaky Science Behind Forensics Forensic...
www.northwestfirearms.com