Simon A. Cole

Publications

• Who Will Regulate American Forensic Science?
  48 SETON HALL L. REV. (2018) · Seton Hall Law Review · 2018
• A Discouraging Omen: A Critical Evaluation of the Approved Uniform Language for Testimony and Reports for the Forensic Latent Print Discipline
  34 GA. ST. U. L. REV. 1103 (2018) · Georgia State University Law Review · 2018
• Scandal, Fraud, and the Reform of Forensic Science: The Case of Fingerprint Analysis
  119 W. VA. L. REV. (2016) · West Virginia Law Review · 2016
• Admissibility Compared: The Reception of Incriminating Expert Evidence (I.E., Forensic Science) in Four Adversarial Jurisdictions
  3 U. DENV. CRIM. L. REV. (2013) · University of Denver Criminal Law Review · 2013
• Should Judges Worry About the “CSI Effect”?
  Court Review: Journal of the American Judges Association · 2011
• ACCULTURATING FORENSIC SCIENCE: WHAT IS ‘SCIENTIFIC CULTURE’, AND HOW CAN FORENSIC SCIENCE ADOPT IT?
  38 FORDHAM URB. L.J. 435 (2010) · Fordham Urban Law Journal · 2010

• Symmetry, Adversarialism, Scholarly Convention, and Latent Print Identification: A Reply to Merlino and Springer
  45 TULSA L. REV. 147 (2009) · Tulsa Law Review · 2009
• Don't Shoot the Messenger by One of the Messengers: A Response to Merlino et al.
  45 TULSA L. REV. 111 (2009) · Tulsa Law Review · 2009
• Is the “Junk” DNA Designation Bunk?
  Northwestern University Law Review · 2007
• Coming Clean About "Junk DNA"
  Northwestern University Law Review · 2007
• Toward Evidence-Based Evidence: Supporting Forensic Knowledge Claims in the Post-Daubert Era
  43 TULSA L. REV. 263 (2007) · Tulsa Law Review · 2007
• Where the Rubber Meets the Road: Thinking about Expert Evidence as Expert Testimony
  52 VILL. L. REV. 803 (2007) · Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) · 2007
• More than Zero: Accounting for Error in Latent Fingerprint Identification
  95 J. CRIM. L. & CRIMINOLOGY 985 (2005) · Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology · 2005
• Commentary: Lessons From the Past for the Genetic Future
  67 BROOK. L. REV. 101 (2001) · Brooklyn Law Review · 2001