WHOSE FAULT?—DAUBERT, THE NAS REPORT, AND THE NOTION OF ERROR IN FORENSIC SCIENCE

Risinger, D. Michael

Journal: Fordham Urban Law Journal

Volume: 38

First Page: 519

Year: 2010

Bluebook Citation: 38 FORDHAM URB. L.J. 519 (2010)

Author: D. Michael Risinger: all 32 publications


Abstract

The notion of “error” and “error rates” is central both to the Daubert opinion and to the recent NAS Report on the strengths and weaknesses of forensic science in the United States. I will not be attempting a full-scale examination of the concept of error in this paper, however, I believe there are some observations that can be made that may be helpful in domesticating in helpful ways the notion of error as it might apply to forensic science expertise. I conclude that we should work to improve diagnosticity for old processes, or to invent or adopt new ones with improved diagnosticity. But failing that, we must do research on (and cooperate with research on) the actual diagnosticity of current process, most of whose diagnosticity in general, and even more importantly, as to each subtask, and under the conditions of real practice is not currently known.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.