Scientific imperialism : “The judge made me do it!”
Details
State: Public
Version: Author's accepted manuscript
License: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Serval ID
serval:BIB_E65394EFD52B
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Scientific imperialism : “The judge made me do it!”
Journal
Science & Justice
ISSN
1355-0306
Publication state
Published
Issued date
30/01/2025
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
65
Number
2
Pages
119-125
Language
english
Abstract
This commentary critically reviews a recently published discussion between Hahn et al. (2023) and Berger et al. (2023) regarding recommendations for the use of probabilistic genotyping systems in criminal proceedings, in particular the proper understanding for the evidentiary use – across legal systems – of results produced by such systems and the communication of system outputs to the judiciary. We find that the exchange between Hahn et al. (2023) and Berger et al. (2023) reveals a profound divide between diametrically opposed positions, which is symptomatic of a lack of clarity in some quarters of forensic science about the role of expert witnesses and, in particular, novel forms of so-called machine-generated evidence in the legal process. We argue that in order to prevent scientific practices from inappropriately invading judicial territory, lawyers should take a more active role in scrutinising recommendations and position statements published by members of the forensic science community.
Keywords
Probabilistic genotyping, Source attribution, Likelihood ratio, Threshold
Publisher's website
Create date
31/01/2025 11:10
Last modification date
01/02/2025 7:25