The first question to me is whether there is scientific evidence that trained criminalists/(trained forensic firearms examiners) can reliably determine matches, not how the process is implemented. And, the second is whether there is scientific evidence of the reliability of matching by each trained criminalist/(trained forensic firearms examiner).
The first set of evidence might be considered proof that the matching process might work in general and the second might be considered proof that a particular criminalist/(trained forensic firearms examiner) was sufficiently skilled to make the general proposition that the matching process can be reliably performed for him. I'm struck by how we seem to be caught up in the process followed, the qualifications of experts and the training of these persons who might be called to testify in court cases, but I never hear of the courts demanding scientific (double blind experiments) evidents of the reliability of any particular expert or evidence of the general reliability of the process. If there had been the proper study performed, the FBI might never have used the lead matching examination as a basis for testimony. We certainly don't accept claims for the efficacy of drugs based on the opinions of experts (double blind experiments are the gold standard in medicine for eliminating biasing of conclusions from analysts). So, where are the studies showing that trained criminalists/(trained forensic firearms examiners) have opinions on ballistic questions worth considering as evidence. Phil > > > RE: Re: DNA predictions flawed? DNA matches but the man doesn't.A major difference between DNA, specifically the CODIS program, and "ballistic fingerprinting" as used in the NIBIN system coordinated nationally by the ATF and FBI, is in the nature of "matching." In CODIS, the computer actually makes the "match." In NIBIN, the computer search reports possible matching records. It is then the responsibility of a trained forensic firearms examiner to examine the images, and eventually the actual evidence, and establish whether or not there is a match involved. This is the same as the AFIS networks in use for fingerprint identification; eventually a trained criminalist must look at the specific items and determine if they do match, or merely have sufficient cyber qualities that the computer reports them out as possibles. > > Also, while "ballistic fingerprinting" as used in Maryland and New York uses the same type hardware as NIBIN (FTI's IBIS), under the rules established by the federal government, the systems are maintained seperate of each other. Of course, as all reports have indicated, no "ballistic fingerprint" system has identified a crime firearm; NIBIN routinely identifies crime scene evidence to both other crimes and to standards submitted as part of criminal investigations. > > Paul R. Laska > Forensic Consultant > www.PaulRLaskaForensicConsulting.com 561-722-4435 > > > > > > In the name of freedom, there has to be a correlation between rights and duties, by which every person is called to assume responsibility for his or her choices. > > > -- Pope Benedict XVI, addressing the UN General Assembly > -- The Art of war is simple enough. Find out where your enemy is. Get at him as soon as you can. Strike at him as hard as you can and as often as you can, and keep moving on. -- Ulysses S. Grant _______________________________________________ To post, send message to [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
