Chicago Tribune Runs Major Series on Forensic Reliability

The Chicago Tribune (free registration required) has launched a major series of articles on whether various forensic techniques measure up to scientific standards. It is fair to say that the reporters are casting a skeptical eye. Sunday's introductory piece, headlined "Forensics Under the Microscope," broadly canvassed the field and pronounced it beset by "questionable science, flawed analysis and shoddy lab practices that sometimes undermine the quest for justice." A sidebar focused on research into the validity of fingerprint identification and ballistics. Today's installment, on arson investigation, says:

For decades, arson investigators relied on a collection of beliefs and folk wisdom that was accepted as truth. In the last 30 years, however, many of these one-time certainties have been exposed by research and laboratory tests as unclear or just plain wrong. . . . While engineers, chemists and other experts increasingly are employed to determine the cause of fires, some arson investigators have not accepted new scientific knowledge. As a result, prosecutors around the country still seek to convict people based on theories that have been systematically debunked.

Tomorrow's piece will focus on bite marks, with pieces on Wednesday and Thursday about disarray in Illinois laboratories and nationwide.