Judges and forensic science education: A national survey

dc.contributor.author Garrett, Brandon
dc.contributor.author Gardner, Brett
dc.contributor.author Murphy, Evan
dc.contributor.author Grimes, Patrick
dc.contributor.department Center for Statistics and Applications in Forensic Evidence
dc.date 2021-04-08T17:43:37.000
dc.date.accessioned 2021-04-30T00:42:55Z
dc.date.available 2021-04-30T00:42:55Z
dc.date.copyright Fri Jan 01 00:00:00 UTC 2021
dc.date.issued 2021-04-01
dc.description.abstract <p>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.</p>
dc.description.comments <p>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." <em>Forensic Science International</em> 321 (2021): 110714. Posted with permission of CSAFE.</p>
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf
dc.identifier archive/lib.dr.iastate.edu/csafe_pubs/79/
dc.identifier.articleid 1078
dc.identifier.contextkey 22394840
dc.identifier.s3bucket isulib-bepress-aws-west
dc.identifier.submissionpath csafe_pubs/79
dc.identifier.uri https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/handle/20.500.12876/104683
dc.language.iso en
dc.source.bitstream archive/lib.dr.iastate.edu/csafe_pubs/79/1_s2.0_S0379073821000347_main.pdf|||Sat Jan 15 01:56:01 UTC 2022
dc.source.uri 10.1016/j.forsciint.2021.110714
dc.subject.disciplines Forensic Science and Technology
dc.subject.keywords Forensic science
dc.subject.keywords Judges
dc.subject.keywords Education
dc.subject.keywords Reliability
dc.subject.keywords Rule 702
dc.subject.keywords Daubert
dc.title Judges and forensic science education: A national survey
dc.type article
dc.type.genre article
dspace.entity.type Publication
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication d8a3c72b-850f-40f6-87c4-8812547080c7
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
602.28 KB
Adobe Portable Document Format