Solving Daubert’s Dilemma for the Forensic Sciences Through Blind Testing

54 Pages Posted: 22 Apr 2020

See all articles by Sandra Guerra Thompson

Sandra Guerra Thompson

University of Houston Law Center

Nicole B. Casarez

University of St. Thomas; University of Houston Law Center

Date Written: April 21, 2020

Abstract

In 1993, in Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the Supreme Court set forth a multi-factored reliability test for scientific evidence. Of the factors courts should consider in determining the validity of scientific evidence, the Court instructed trial courts to consider the “potential error rate” of the scientific method. In 2009, the National Academy of Sciences, in its landmark report on the state of forensic science, came to this remarkable conclusion: “[N]o forensic method other than nuclear DNA analysis has been rigorously shown to have the capacity to consistently and with a high degree of certainty support conclusions about ‘individualization’ (more commonly known as ‘matching’ of an unknown item of evidence to a specific known source).” Of course, matching items of evidence to a specific known source is the central mission of forensic science, so this critique has led to considerable study and research over the past ten years aimed at developing statistical methods to measure error rates in these disciplines. Yet we have seen little progress in developing a statistical foundation for forensic disciplines, which continues to represent a pressing concern. Without reliable information about how often a forensic science process yields the wrong answer, the probative value of forensic evidence is impossible to quantify.

This Article describes a major breakthrough in developing a statistical foundation for forensic science disciplines: a cutting-edge blind proficiency testing program operating in six disciplines at the Houston Forensic Science Center (HFSC). By introducing mock evidence samples into the ordinary workflow of its laboratory analysts, HFSC has begun to develop statistical data that will allow it to calculate error rates for those disciplines. We provide specific details regarding how the program operates in HFSC’s toxicology, firearms, and latent prints sections, and discuss both the challenges and benefits the laboratory has experienced because of the blind proficiency testing program. We propose that criminal justice stakeholders should urge other forensic laboratories to implement similar blind proficiency testing programs to develop the statistical data needed to prove the scientific validity of the forensic disciplines.

Keywords: forensic science, crime laboratories, Daubert, scientific evidence, blind testing, proficiency testing, scientific validity, evidence, rules of evidence, scientific reliability, admissibility

Suggested Citation

Thompson, Sandra Guerra and Casarez, Nicole B., Solving Daubert’s Dilemma for the Forensic Sciences Through Blind Testing (April 21, 2020). 57 Houston Law Review 617 (2020); U of Houston Law Center No. 2020-A-3. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3581814

Sandra Guerra Thompson (Contact Author)

University of Houston Law Center ( email )

4604 Calhoun Road
Houston, TX 77204-6060
United States

Nicole B. Casarez

University of St. Thomas ( email )

3800 Montrose Blvd
Houston, TX 77006
United States

University of Houston Law Center ( email )

4604 Calhoun Road
Houston, TX 77204-6060
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
34
Abstract Views
174
PlumX Metrics