. . . As questions arise about the reliability of ballistic, bite-mark and even fingerprint analysis . . .
I have my own doubts about fingerprint analysis.
Twice I've had my fingerprints taken as part of a background check process - each time by an LEO using a fingerprint kit.
Twice the prints have had to be redone by Texas DPS. Other folks I've talked to have had similar experiences.
If a trained tech using a standard kit can't reliably get prints from a co-operative subject, I have serious doubts about the validity of prints supposedly lifted from crime scenes.
No prosecutor would want me on a jury in a case where fingerprint evidence was an important part of his case.
. . . As questions arise about the reliability of ballistic, bite-mark and even fingerprint analysis . . .
I have my own doubts about fingerprint analysis.
[snip]
No prosecutor would want me on a jury in a case where fingerprint evidence was an important part of his case.
Properly done, fingerprint analysis could be pretty reliable. Only, it ain't properly done most of the time. I've seen fingerprint scanners that use very small lasers to read a couple THOUSAND points and compare. Even then, often you had to use alcohol wipes on your finger prior to using it as dirt occassionally threw off the scanners. Oh, and make a trip to the Security office for rescanning if you cut or burned a finger. With modern technology, I'd personally be early of a couple dozen point comparison.
"Ballistic fingerprints" is more or less a load of hogwash under most circumstances. Except for groove count, it's not ANYWHERE near as reliable as what folks try to pass off. Even Cali and Maryland State Polices have said it's statistically worthless.
Here's a much better written article on 'ballistic fingerprinting': http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/lott200502040751.asp
Exactly why I want the government to have nothing to do with the death penalty. "But we have his DNA". Right. I'll take video, confession, or several eyewitnesses. Nothing else.
Eyewitnesses are also incredibly unreliable. Or course, several of them, untainted, with matching descriptions is helpful, but that's about it.