Judges and forensic science education: A national survey

Thumbnail Image
Garrett, Brandon
Gardner, Brett
Murphy, Evan
Grimes, Patrick
Major Professor
Committee Member
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Organizational Unit
Center for Statistics and Applications in Forensic Evidence
The Center for Statistics and Applications in Forensic Evidence (CSAFE) carries out research on the scientific foundations of forensic methods, develops novel statistical methods and transfers knowledge and technological innovations to the forensic science community. We collaborate with more than 80 researchers and across six universities to drive solutions to support our forensic community partners with accessible tools, open-source databases and educational opportunities.
Journal Issue
Is Version Of

In criminal cases, forensic science reports and expert testimony play an increasingly important role in adjudication. More states now follow a federal reliability standard, which calls upon judges to assess the reliability and validity of scientific evidence. Little is known about how judges view their own background in forensic scientific evidence, and what types of specialized training they receive on it. In this study, we surveyed 164 judges from 39 different U.S. states, who attended past trainings at the National Judicial College. We asked these judges about their background in forensic science, their views concerning the reliability of common forensic disciplines, and their needs to better evaluate forensic science evidence. We discovered that judges held views regarding the scientific support for different forensic science disciplines that were fairly consistent with available literature; their error rate estimates were more supported by research than many estimates by laypersons, who often assume forensic methods are nearly infallible. We did not find any association between how judges rate forensic reliability and prior training. We did, however, find that training corresponded with judges’ views that they should, and do in fact, take on a more active gatekeeping role regarding forensics. Regarding the tools judges need to vet forensic experts and properly evaluate forensic science evidence, they reported having very different backgrounds in relevant scientific concepts and having forensic science education needs. Judges reported needs in accessing better material concerning reliability of forensic science methods. These results support new efforts to expand scientific evidence education in the judiciary.


The following is a manuscript of an article published as Garrett, Brandon L., Brett O. Gardner, Evan Murphy, and Patrick Grimes. "Judges and forensic science education: A national survey." Forensic Science International 321 (2021): 110714. Posted with permission of CSAFE.

Fri Jan 01 00:00:00 UTC 2021