Review by Choice Review
Garrett (Duke Univ. School of Law) questions the use of forensics in court cases: How reliable is the forensic evidence used to convict people? How reliable are forensic examiners? He states these concerns in his introduction, recounting the tale of a fingerprint misidentified by three FBI examiners, and continues pleading his case throughout the volume. The book describes how lawyers, scientists, and investigators have uncovered the full scope of the crisis. Part 1 looks at the reliability of forensic evidence that cannot be scientifically stated and can lead to wrongful convictions. Parts 2 and 3 cover, e.g., the reliability of specific types of forensic evidence, including firearms and "infallible" experts, bias, and overstating; bite marks, fire scenes, and blood patterns. Quality control lapses, outright contamination, and technicians stealing evidence or falsifying records all contribute to unreliable and false results. Part 4 covers recent positive developments in lab technology and protocols. The final chapter ("Fixing Forensics") summarizes ways to remediate, including verification, promoting transparency, and proficiency testing. Garrett shatters illusions that forensics are always scientifically accurate, and that experts brought in to testify always know their subject. He provides resources to move forward and fix forensics, to ensure that human and scientific errors are kept to a minimum. Summing Up: Recommended. Upper-division undergraduates. Graduate students, faculty, and professionals. --Karen Evans, Indiana State University
Copyright American Library Association, used with permission.
Review by Choice Review
