Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Of moos and clucks-the myth of FTIR identification

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Of moos and clucks-the myth of FTIR identification

On March 8, 2012, in Chemistry, Contextual Bias, Equipment, Ethics, Ethics: Scientist, Identification, In The Courtroom, Infrared Spectroscopy, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

Of moos and clucks-the myth of FTIR identification By:  Frederic Whitehurst, J.D., Ph.D. [1] OK, so we will now discuss moos and clucks. Which is the basis for the problem with Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) in forensic science. [2] If you close your eyes in a stock yard you can’t tell what moo came […]

Zero is not a valid data point for calibration purposes

Zero is not a valid data point for calibration purposes

On March 6, 2012, in Chemistry, Equipment, Ethics, Ethics: Scientist, Identification, In The Courtroom, Laboratory Procedure, Metrology, by Justin J. McShane

When the quantitative measurement really matters to determine guilt, we have to understand how that measurement is achieved. In the case of the analysis of biological samples that are tested, quantitation of an unknown is derived from a calibration curve. The proper construction of the calibration curve is a crucial component of quality control. It […]

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Circuitous thought-the myth of reliable and valid marijuana identification in the courtroom

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Circuitous thought-the myth of reliable and valid marijuana identification in the courtroom

On March 1, 2012, in Chemistry, Contextual Bias, Equipment, Ethics, Ethics: Scientist, Identification, In The Courtroom, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

Circuitous thought-the myth of reliable and valid marijuana identification in the courtroom By:  Frederic Whitehurst, J.D., Ph.D. [1] As scientists we all agree that the hallmarks of science are validity and reliability. What do we mean by that? Well, the government scientist has to agree that his method of answering a question put to him […]

The myth of the neutral scientist doing forensic science

The myth of the neutral scientist doing forensic science

On February 28, 2012, in Contextual Bias, Ethics: Scientist, General Information, In The Courtroom, Laboratory Procedure, by Justin J. McShane

One of the most ridiculous claims that I hear in court is a claim by a forensic technician or expert witness (regardless of what particular discipline he or she is from) that somehow he or she is a neutral and detached scientist doing science, and therefore he or she has no bias whatsoever. This total […]

The Confrontation Clause: Who has to show up in court and why

The Confrontation Clause: Who has to show up in court and why

On February 24, 2012, in Ethics, Ethics: Lawyer, In The Courtroom, Lectures, by Justin J. McShane

The below is a full lecture on the Confrontation Clause and the explanation of the “Primary Purpose Rule,” the “Particular Witness Rule,” and an examination of all of the current cases as decided or pending before the United States Supreme Court. This lecture is presented from a practical point of view for the benefit of […]

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Forensic Science “Matches”-The Case of Black Powder

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Forensic Science “Matches”-The Case of Black Powder

On February 16, 2012, in Arson, Chemistry, Contextual Bias, Crime Scene Investigation, Identification, In The Courtroom, by Justin J. McShane

Forensic Science “Matches”-The Case of Black Powder By:  Frederic Whitehurst, J.D., Ph.D. [1] While reviewing case opinions in criminal matters involving forensic examinations one is often presented with various adjectives of comparison such as “matches,” “consistent with,” and “identical to.” Counsel seeing these adjectives in forensic reports may be elated if legal theories are supported […]

Why not stipulate to a forensic science result?

Why not stipulate to a forensic science result?

On February 14, 2012, in Chemistry, Contextual Bias, Equipment, Ethics, Ethics: Lawyer, General Information, In The Courtroom, by Justin J. McShane

I was recently asked a question which is basically this: “Justin, why don’t you stipulate to any forensic science result ever?” My answer is simple. I haven’t found a single analytical test or a single forensic science result that does not have some area of legitimate inquiry whether it is in the data (the test […]

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: “Matches” An Over inference of Data? A Giglio Obligation? The case of Paint Examination

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: “Matches” An Over inference of Data? A Giglio Obligation? The case of Paint Examination

On February 9, 2012, in Chemistry, Contextual Bias, Ethics, Ethics: Scientist, Identification, In The Courtroom, Paint Analysis, Trace Evidence, by Justin J. McShane

“Matches” An Over inference of Data? A Giglio Obligation?: The case of Paint Examination By:  Frederic Whitehurst, J.D., Ph.D. [1] and Darlene R. Brezinski, Ph.D.[2] Forensic chemical analyses of complex matrices such as plastics, paints, or paper products, may lead to inconclusive results without analysts or reviewing counsel aware of the failing of the analyses. Complex […]

Quality Control in GC-FID: Teaching the machine right from wrong

Quality Control in GC-FID: Teaching the machine right from wrong

On February 7, 2012, in Chemistry, Equipment, Ethics, Ethics: Scientist, GC-FID & GC/MS, Identification, In The Courtroom, Laboratory Procedure, Metrology, Standards, by Justin J. McShane

It is shocking but very true statement that most sophisticated instruments such as a Gas Chromatograph (GC) with various detectors whether it is a mass spectrometer (MS) or flame ionization detector (FID) when produced and manufactured are incapable of producing meaningful results “straight out of the box.” These machines have to be “taught” what it […]

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Mr. Fletcher vs. Mr. Daubert A Journey into the Surreal

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Mr. Fletcher vs. Mr. Daubert A Journey into the Surreal

On February 2, 2012, in Chemistry, Contextual Bias, Identification, In The Courtroom, Laboratory Procedure, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

Mr. Fletcher vs. Mr. Daubert: A Journey into the Surreal   By:  Frederic Whitehurst, J.D., Ph.D. Many a defense attorney has looked in amazement at the courtroom “identification” of Cannabis Sativa L. by a law enforcement officer sporting a gilded pot metal badge and a high school diploma who has written a report that would […]

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 7: Is there a better way to test for marijuana?

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 7: Is there a better way to test for marijuana?

On January 31, 2012, in Chemistry, Equipment, Ethics, Ethics: Scientist, Identification, In The Courtroom, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

Throughout this series of posts we have examined the Thorton-Nakumura protocol that is used throughout the United States for the prosecution of illegal possession marijuana. A fair examination of the question reveals that there is no validity to the notion that the 3 test regimen produces a valid conclusion that the unknown examined in fact […]