NCSTL

It's Evident...
NCSTL's Quarterly e-Newsletter

FROM THE DIRECTOR’S DESK... Carol Henderson

NCSTL is particularly excited about this issue of It’s Evident for two reasons. One, it is the first issue published since the NCSTL reorganization in 2012. Two, it is the first of five issues which will focus on forensic matters of concern to capital litigators. This column is a synopsis of what NCSTL has accomplished in 2012 and the first half of 2013 and highlights what is new.

http://www.ncstl.org’s “one-stop-shop” database currently holds almost 140,000 records of which over 7,900 are multimedia records. NCSTL continues to develop and consolidate forensic-based information including webcasts, podcasts, vodcasts, blog links, and training materials which focus on science, technology and law topics;
People from over 170 countries search the growing database, read most current forensic-related news in the Spotlight section and It's Evident, locate events on the NCSTL Calendar, explore Education & Training resources, listen to talks given by forensic experts featured in the Multimedia area of the homepage, and subscribe to NCSTL's RSS Feeds.
NCSTL sponsored a presentation, The Devil is in the Details: Criminal Profiling from an Investigator's Perspective, by Dale Hinman, on October 31, 2012 at Stetson University College of Law in Gulfport, FL. Two hundred fifty people attended and it was simulcast as well.
NCSTL is proud to announce the release of the newly developed SANE/SART Forensic Nursing Program. This program, a collaborative effort between NCSTL and the SANE-SART Resource Service, provides both face-to-face and online training for nurses who deal with forensic cases. Additionally, NCSTL would like to remind readers that the online course, Law 101: A Legal Guide for the Forensic Expert, housed on DNA.gov, remains highly popular and was billed as “one of the most popular courses ever offered on DNA.gov”. It is free and available to the public. To see it and/or take the course, go to http://nij.gov/training/courses/law-101.htm.
To inform NCSTL's constituency, which includes law enforcement, legal professionals, scientists, engineers, educators, and technologists, NCSTL representatives make presentations and offer training on a multitude of topics. NCSTL has trained more than 12,500 people. On May 21-22, 2012 held a Capital Litigation training on Scientific Evidence in Las Vegas, NV. Anjali Ranadive, Director of Outreach, conducted an in-person Mock Trial training in Round Rock, TX on July 16-17, 2013 and presented DNA training on two online webinars on June 13, 2013. This training is part of the collaborative effort between NCSTL and the SANE-SART Resource Service to deliver a comprehensive training program for forensic nurses.

At the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) annual meeting held in Atlanta, GA in February 20 – 25, 2012, I judged the Emerging Young Forensic Scientists Best Paper Competition and received an award of merit for service on the Journal of Forensic Sciences editorial board from 2003 – 2012. My work with AAFS continues. I am a member of the planning committee for the Mentorship-In-Motion Project session for the annual meeting on February 17-22, 2014 in Seattle.

I presented Skeptically Determining the Limits of Expert Testimony in Evidence to the State Bar of New Mexico and participated on a Q and A panel which was recorded live and webcast in Albuquerque, New Mexico on March 30, 2012. On May 3, 2012, I worked with the American Association for the Advancement of Science regarding recommendations for an advisory panel for their pilot project on evaluating forensic science literature. On February 22, 2013, I presented information on NCSTL and how to research scientific evidence as part of the Winning Your Case with Cutting-Edge Science seminar at the NACDL mid-year meeting in Washington, D.C.

See more updates in the next column ...

Wishing you all the best!
Carol

Summer, 2013

RESEARCH SPOTLIGHT
Jury Selection Issues in Highly Publicized Trials: The Quest For Ignorance
Alan Balfour, J.D., Ph.D., Associate Professor, University of South Florida

“The jury system puts a ban upon intelligence and honesty, and a premium upon ignorance, stupidity, and perjury. I wish to so alter it as to put a premium on intelligence and character….” Roughing It

Mark Twain penned those words in 1872. Presumably, they were largely true then. Arguably, they are even more true in 2013. The desire to seat jurors who are ignorant of and uninvolved in the world around them seems a fool’s errand in both intent and practice. Twain’s goals are noble goals. Efforts should be made to accomplish them ... or should there be? Full paper

Interpretation of Crime Laboratory Reports
Barry A. J. Fisher, Retired Crime Lab Director of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department

This short paper is designed to give trial attorneys some basics on how to examine expert witnesses. Naturally, it is not possible to become “pros” in this area right way. It takes practice, but this information may give you some hints on how you may proceed. At least, hopefully, you may have a better understanding of conclusions stated in crime laboratory reports.

What do terms like “match,” “similar to,” “the same as,” “identical,” and a host of other vague terms that try to related a known to an unknown actually mean? What does the expert mean when he reports interpreting crime lab reports. Full paper

The Mythology of Arson Investigation
John J. Lentini, CFEI, F-ABC, Scientific Fire Analysis, LLC

Unlike in many other fields of scientific inquiry, progress in fire investigation is held back by the burden of an entrenched mythology. Despite the fact that it has been fifteen years since NFPA 921 was first published, some fire investigators still rely on “misconceptions” about the meaning of various fire effects and fire patterns.

This paper explores the development and promulgation of the mythology of arson investigation. Certainly, there is no reason to believe that anyone ever set out to promulgate something that was not true. It is likely that many myths came about as a result of unwarranted generalizations. For example, an investigator might observe a pattern of spalling around the remains of a gasoline container and make an association of gasoline with spalling. The next time that spalling is observed, gasoline is inferred. Full paper

FROM THE RESEARCH DESK...
Diana Botluk, J.D., Director of Research

Check out the NCSTL exclusive forensic videos created by NCSTL Research Attorney, Kevin Paget: Forensics of Firearms and History of Fingerprints.

Visit the NCSTL's Selected Books Added to the NCSTL Collection in the Stetson Library and the NCSTL's Special Collections. Borrow from the collections.

TECHNOLOGY AND DISTANCE EDUCATION NEWS
Susan Zucker, Ph.D., Director Technology & Distance Education and Publisher and Editor of It's Evident

Become NCSTL's fan on Facebook and a follower on Twitter.

FROM THE DIRECTOR’S DESK (CONTINUED): I have served as Co-Chair of the American Bar Association Section of Science & Technology Law Scientific Evidence Committee. In this role, I assist the section in updating their website, present webinars and CLE. This month I will become the Co-Chair of the Life and Physical Sciences Division of the section. The ABA recently published Scientific Evidence Review: Admissibility and the Use of Expert Testimony in the Courtroom, Monograph No. 9, which I co-edited with Cynthia Cwik and Jules Epstein. The monograph provides an introductory overview of United States Supreme Court decisions regarding admissibility issues. It then provides circuit by circuit chapters with case abstracts written by experienced attorneys. We also included articles examining the impact on court decisions of the National Academy of Sciences 2009 Report regarding forensic evidence and an article about the factors taken into account when selecting an expert. Monograph No. 9 is available at the ABA web store.