How Cross‐Examination on Subjectivity and Bias Affects Jurors’ Evaluations of Forensic Science Evidence

Contextual bias has been widely discussed as a possible problem in forensic science. The trial simulation experiment reported here examined reactions of jurors at a county courthouse to cross‐examination and arguments about contextual bias in a hypothetical case. We varied whether the key prosecution witness (a forensic odontologist) was cross‐examined about the subjectivity of his interpretations and about his exposure to potentially biasing task‐irrelevant information. Jurors found the expert less credible and were less likely to convict when the expert admitted that his interpretation rested on subjective judgment, and when he admitted having been exposed to potentially biasing task‐irrelevant contextual information (relative to when these issues were not raised by the lawyers). The findings suggest, however, that forensic scientists can immunize themselves against such challenges and maximize the weight jurors give their evidence by adopting context management procedures that blind them to task‐irrelevant information

A Preliminary Investigation into the Accuracy of 3D Modeling and 3D Printing in Forensic Anthropology Evidence Reconstruction

There is currently no published empirical evidence-base demonstrating 3D printing to be an accurate and reliable tool in forensic anthropology, despite 3D printed replicas being exhibited as demonstrative evidence in court. In this study, human bones (n = 3) scanned using computed tomography were reconstructed as virtual 3D models (n = 6), and 3D printed using six commercially available printers, with osteometric data recorded at each stage. Virtual models and 3D prints were on average accurate to the source bones, with mean differences from -0.4 to 1.2 mm (-0.4% to 12.0%). Interobserver differences ranged from -5.1 to 0.7 mm (-5.3% to 0.7%). Reconstruction and modeling parameters influenced accuracy, and prints produced using selective laser sintering (SLS) were most consistently accurate. This preliminary investigation into virtual modeling and 3D printer capability provides a novel insight into the accuracy of 3D printing osteological samples and begins to establish an evidence-base for validating 3D printed bones as demonstrative evidence