ABSTRACT
Forensic science evidence has the potential to assist courts with their truth-seeking function but also has the considerable potential to skew that function. A very fundamental and underlying problem is that the knowledge coming from forensic science disciplines is frequently inaccessible, on an intellectual level, to lay persons who lack previous familiarity with the knowledge, including lawyers and judges. Lawyers sometimes miss opportunities to call the expert on inadequate qualifications, or to question the soundness of the science itself, during cross-examination. The problems reveal that there is often a considerable distance between the perceived credibility of forensic science evidence and its factual accuracy. Recent renditions of the conference have seen a significant number of presentations on topics such as addressing forensic expert witness bias, the ways in which some methods of forensic testing can lead to erroneous conclusions, and steps that defense counsel can take against incriminating forensic science evidence.
