ABSTRACT
Scientists called to review and testify regarding canine evidence must understand why their knowledge is being sought inside the judicial system. Trial lawyers are not peer reviewers, and judges and juries are not editors of scientific journals, yet they all can be as critical in their own ways as the system that scientists regularly encounter in trying to get their work published. As a witness in a criminal case, the scientist wants his or her expertise acknowledged and opinions accepted, yet the lawyer for the other side is likely to hammer repetitively at weaknesses that might be trivial in the peer-reviewing system of a journal. Some understanding of the use of science in trials will therefore be helpful to scientists whose perspectives are sought by the judicial system. This chapter will examine how scientific research on the ability of dogs to match scents of suspects to odors left at crime scenes has been taken into account during criminal trials.
