The nation’s crime labs that help authorities analyze evidence to catch killers and other criminals are underfunded, understaffed, and lacking effective oversight, according to a congressionally mandated report from the National Research Council. The report finds that there are serious deficiencies in the U.S. forensic science system and that there is a need for major reforms and new research. Rigorous and mandatory certification programs for forensic scientists are lacking, the report says, as are strong standards and protocols for analyzing and reporting on evidence. And, it says, there is a dearth of peer-reviewed, published studies establishing the scientific bases and reliability of many forensic methods.

 

Forensic evidence is often offered in criminal prosecutions and civil litigation to match a piece of evidence to a particular person, weapon, or other source. But with the exception of nuclear DNA analysis, the report says, no forensic method has been rigorously shown able to consistently, and with a high degree of certainty, demonstrate a connection between evidence and a specific individual or source.

 

Non-DNA forensic disciplines have important roles, but many need substantial research to validate basic premises and techniques, assess limitations, and discern the sources and magnitude of error, the report says. Even methods that are too imprecise to identify a specific individual can provide valuable information and help narrow the range of possible suspects or sources.

 

“Reliable forensic evidence increases the ability of law enforcement officials to identify those who commit crimes, and it protects innocent people from being convicted of crimes they didn't commit,” says committee co-chair Harry Edwards, senior circuit judge and chief judge emeritus of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. “Because it is clear that judicial review alone will not cure the infirmities of the forensic science community, there is a tremendous need for the forensic science community to improve.”

 

Strong leadership is needed to adopt and promote an aggressive, long-term agenda to strengthen forensic science, the report says. To achieve this end, the report urges Congress to establish a new, independent National Institute of Forensic Science to lead research efforts, establish and enforce standards for forensic science professionals and laboratories, and oversee education standards.

 

“Much research is needed not only to evaluate the reliability and accuracy of current forensic methods but also to innovate and develop them further,” says committee co-chair Constantine Gatsonis, professor of biostatistics and director of the Center for Statistical Sciences at Brown University. “An organized and well-supported research enterprise is a key requirement for carrying this out.”

 

To ensure the efficacy of the work done by forensic scientists and other practitioners in the field, the report recommends that public forensic science laboratories should be made independent from or autonomous within police departments and prosecutors’ offices. This would allow labs to set their own budget priorities and resolve any cultural pressures caused by the differing missions of forensic science labs and law enforcement agencies.

 

Certification should be mandatory for forensic science professionals, the report says. Among the steps required for certification should be written examinations, supervised practice, proficiency testing, and adherence to a code of ethics. Accreditation for laboratories should be required as well. Labs should establish quality-control procedures designed to ensure that best practices are followed, confirm the continued validity and reliability of procedures, and identify mistakes, fraud, and bias, the report says.