Scientific imperialism : “The judge made me do it!”

IF 1.9 4区医学 Q2 MEDICINE, LEGAL

Science & Justice Pub Date : 2025-01-25 DOI:10.1016/j.scijus.2025.01.003

Alex Biedermann , Kyriakos N. Kotsoglou

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This commentary critically reviews a recently published discussion between Hahn et al. (2023) and Berger et al. (2023) regarding recommendations for the use of probabilistic genotyping systems in criminal proceedings, in particular the proper understanding for the evidentiary use – across legal systems – of results produced by such systems and the communication of system outputs to the judiciary. We find that the exchange between Hahn et al. (2023) and Berger et al. (2023) reveals a profound divide between diametrically opposed positions, which is symptomatic of a lack of clarity in some quarters of forensic science about the role of expert witnesses and, in particular, novel forms of so-called machine-generated evidence in the legal process. We argue that in order to prevent scientific practices from inappropriately invading judicial territory, lawyers should take a more active role in scrutinising recommendations and position statements published by members of the forensic science community.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Science & Justice 医学-病理学

CiteScore

4.20

自引率

15.80%

发文量

审稿时长

81 days

期刊介绍： Science & Justice provides a forum to promote communication and publication of original articles, reviews and correspondence on subjects that spark debates within the Forensic Science Community and the criminal justice sector. The journal provides a medium whereby all aspects of applying science to legal proceedings can be debated and progressed. Science & Justice is published six times a year, and will be of interest primarily to practising forensic scientists and their colleagues in related fields. It is chiefly concerned with the publication of formal scientific papers, in keeping with its international learned status, but will not accept any article describing experimentation on animals which does not meet strict ethical standards. Promote communication and informed debate within the Forensic Science Community and the criminal justice sector. To promote the publication of learned and original research findings from all areas of the forensic sciences and by so doing to advance the profession. To promote the publication of case based material by way of case reviews. To promote the publication of conference proceedings which are of interest to the forensic science community. To provide a medium whereby all aspects of applying science to legal proceedings can be debated and progressed. To appeal to all those with an interest in the forensic sciences.