Innocence Blog

Science Thursdays: Scientists Urge Review of Cases Based on Bad Science

Posted: May 5, 2011 6:45 pm

Forensic scientists support reexamining cases that are based on obsolete science, researchers use a new method of fragmentation to evade digital forensics and animal cruelty experts enlist forensic scientists in an investigation. Here’s a roundup of forensics news:

Forensic scientists advocate for a “duty to correct” – a reexamination of older cases where findings may have been based on obsolete science.

Researchers found that defragmentation is more effective than encryption in evading digital forensics.

Sonoma County supervisors approved a one-year extension of the county’s contract with the private company whose botched autopsies were revealed by a recent PBS Frontline investigation.

Ontario’s highest court has acquitted a man who was found guilty in the death of his infant son based on testimony from disgraced forensic pathologist Charles Smith.

A Minnesota newspaper highlights the work of a local forensic anthropologist. 

The British Columbia Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is undertaking an animal cruelty investigation and has enlisted international forensic experts to excavate a mass grave of 100 sled dogs.