We were delighted to see this article by USALI long-term partner Judge Jed Rakoff in this week's New York Review of Books, regarding the problem of inaccurate eyewitness identifications and also responding thoughtfully to how this problem might be addressed in an age where the majority of criminal matters are disposed of by plea bargain.
There have been several important legal developments in Australia and New Zealand over the past two weeks relating to the use of DNA evidence in criminal investigations. The first takes place in Australia's second largest state - Victoria. The second development is that the New Zealand Law Commission (a government funded law reform body) will soon close its public submissions period for its study The Use of DNA in Criminal Investigations.
Two great pieces on junk science litigation and investigations this week:
The first, from the ABA Journal, tracks a lawsuit by the Innocence Project against the National Museum of Health and Medicine of the Department of Defense seeking disclosure of the records of the American Board of Forensic Odontologists (ABFO) (aka "the bite mark experts"), more here: