ABSTRACT

In 2005, a convergence of legal and scientic pressures on the forensic sciences was cited as the beginning of the end of business as usual for their implementation (Saks and Koehler 2005). One major reason for this perception of change in forensic sciences research was the rise of DNA as the “gold standard.” In part, this success of DNA analysis in the courtroom was due to the robust state of the population genetics community already in existence when forensic DNA research came of age. They provided a clear path for investigators to follow to “get it right” with their interpretations of DNA evidence (National Research Council [U.S.]. Committee on DNA Forensic Science: An Update and National Research Council [U.S.]. Commission on DNA Forensic Science: An Update 1996). The genetics community example highlighted weaknesses in the nature of inferences derived from other elds, culminating in a National Research Council (NRC) report on forensic sciences in 2009 (National Research Council [U.S.] Committee on Identifying the Needs of the Forensic Science Community et al. 2009), which called for an increase in basic research in forensic sciences.