President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology Recommends that Some Forensic Evidence Should Not Be Introduced in Federal Court

On September 19, 2016, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) issued a 174-page report titled “Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods”. Read

The PCAST Report does not bind any prosecutors or any courts, but it contains arguments that defense attorneys will use to exclude certain forensic evidence.  These motions have already begun.

PCAST found that the following disciplines lack “foundational validity” and expects that this evidence may be found inadmissible because it lacks scientific validity:

  • Bite marks
  • Firearms tool mark identification
  • Footwear analysis
  • Hair analysis

Additionally, though PCAST found the following disciplines “foundationally valid,” PCAST provides the following caveats:

  • Fingerprint comparisons from latent prints should only be admitted with an instruction that the comparison has a high error rate.
  • DNA from complex-mixture samples should be carefully scrutinized by the judge before admission.  However, the Combined-Probability of Inclusion method of testing DNA complex mixtures lacks “foundational validity.”

Full-time prosecutors may contact NAGTRI Center for Ethics & Public Integrity Director Amie Ely at [email protected] for an excellent and detailed analysis of the PCAST Report.

The response to the PCAST report has included the following:

  • Critical of the report
  • Attorney General Loretta Lynch – The US Department of Justice “will not be adopting the recommendations” of PCAST:  Read
  • FBI: Read
  • National District Attorneys Association: Read
  • American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors: Read
  • Supportive of the Report
  • Federal District Court Judge Alex Kozinski (senior advisor to PCAST):  Read
  • Federal District Court Judge Harry Edwards (senior advisor to PCAST) Read