ABSTRACT
The dominant conception of forensic sciences is as a patchwork of disciplines assisting the criminal justice system, but the 2009 NAS report questioned the robustness of the scientific foundations of essentially all the forensic science disciplines. Yet, solutions intended to counter this disturbing assessment have mainly focused on methodology upgrades epitomized by quality management strategies that are crowned by accreditation of laboratories and certification of individual forensic scientists.While a forensic science world without quality management is senseless, its reported and observed implementation begs the question whether it has developed from a necessary tool to a constraint contributing to frame a mistaken view of experimental sciences dedicated to responding to criminal and litigation matters. This article questions the adequacy of forensic-led regulation strategies for security problem-solving, calling fora better understanding of its original link with criminological concerns.
