Appraisal of scientific evidence in criminal justice systems: on winds of change and coexisting formats

Abstract

Interpretation concepts of scientific evidence have always been under discussion among forensic scientists and among all stakeholders of criminal proceedings in general. It seems that this issue has been attracting more attention since the introduction of the case assessment and interpretation (CAI) model in the late nineties and even more since the release of the National Academies of Science report ‘Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States’ in 2009. Following the debates there is, however, a certain danger of overcompensation if the input of stakeholders from e.g. inquisitorial criminal systems is under-represented. Without doubt, a likelihood ratio-based approach can be a powerful tool assisting in logically complex case assessments and judicial considerations of evidence. However, the application of this approach should be an option rather than an international standard as it concerns the concept of the stakeholder’s roles more profoundly in some countries than in others and may possibly take some countries by surprise. In the following article, this is discussed and some proposals are put forward which appear suitable to strengthen the evaluation of forensic results by the principle of methodological pluralism rather than by an exclusive and compulsory commitment to only one approach.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 9 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.