Mandatory certification of forensic science practitioners in the United States: A supportive perspective

Melbourn, Haley; Smith, Gabriella; McFarland, Jessica; Rogers, Melissa B.; Wieland, Kelsey; DeWilde, Delilah; Lighthart, Sarah; Quinn, Matthew J.; Baxter, Alexis; Quarino, Lawrence

doi:10.1016/j.fsisyn.2019.08.001

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The court, the parties to the US legal proceedings assess the competence of an expert by having a certificate or licence for this activity (for example, an expert in medicine has the right to testify only in a specialised field and after receiving the appropriate certificate [4,[12][13][14]. If an expert does not have this document, then he/she can be involved in legal proceedings only as an assistant or technical consultant ("the consulting expert", "the lay witness") [6, p. 3; 15, p. 4].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal basis for the participation of an expert in the proceedings of the Russian Federation and the United States of America

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this research is to consider the legal status of an expert in the legal proceedings of the Russian Federation and the United States. In the paper used were such research methods as analysis, synthesis, formal legal and comparative legal. The methods of analysis and synthesis were used to clarify the legal status of an expert in the Russian Federation and the United States. The use of formal legal and comparative legal methods made it possible to conduct a comprehensive comparative study of procedural legislation. The authors applied an integrated approach to the study of the role and essence of competent persons in the two countries’ proceedings. The comparative legal analysis of the rules of proceedings of the Russian Federation and the United States resulted in an assessment of the legislative regulation of the institute of specific expertise in legal proceedings. The given methodological tools made it possible to comprehensively generalise and systematise theoretical postulates, develop their own opinion on issues of the expert participation in the proceedings of the Russian Federation and the United States discussed in the scientific literature. The novelty of the research lies in the fact that it made it possible to assess further prospects for engaging competent persons in Russian legal proceedings. The results obtained during the work can be used for further research in the field of application of special knowledge in the legal proceedings of the Russian Federation and the United States.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal basis for the participation of an expert in the proceedings of the Russian Federation and the United States of America

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[ [19] , [20] , [21] ], while other quality assurance themes address the tactical and operational decisions with attention to total quality management systems [ 22 , 23 ] and Lean Six Sigma [ 11 , 24 ]. Additional attention to quality and consistency emphasizes the role of the International Organization for Standardization [ 10 , [24] , [25] , [26] , [27] ] and certification of individuals [ [28] , [29] , [30] , [31] , [32] ].…”

Section: Themes In the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Quality assurance can be supported in several other ways, many but not all of which are tied to accreditation standards. The following is a non-exhaustive list of quality assurance methods, the details of which can be found either in other sections of this review or in the supporting texts cited: lean six sigma or total quality management approach to improve turnaround time and efficiency [ 11 , 116 , 117 ]; Daku,2019 [ 118 ]; the use of a LIMS or case management system [ 10 , 111 , 119 ]; blind proficiency testing [ 20 , 27 , 30 , 53 , 54 , 108 , 120 ]; improved education or certification of forensic scientists and technicians [ 15 , 20 , [29] , [30] , [31] , 36 , 40 , 52 , 115 , 121 ]; other stakeholders [ 10 , 40 , 58 ]; improvements in organizational culture and stress reduction [ 19 , 23 , 116 , 122 ]; laboratory independence [ 17 , 18 , 52 , 120 ]; effective use of regulation [ 15 , 16 , 31 , 109 ]; improvements in evidence chain of custody and storage [ 10 , 119 , 123 , 124 ]; improvements in crime scene management and testing standards [ 10 , 15 , 125 , 126 ]; and reduction of biases and conflicts of interest [ [15] , [16] , [17] , 20 , 21 , 52 , 53 , …”

Section: Tactical Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interpol review of forensic management, 2019–2022

McAndrew

Speaker

Houck

2023

Forensic Science International: Synergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Indeed, the groundwork for this was laid in Europe with accreditation of the Department of Forensic Entomology of the Institut de Recherche Criminelle de la Gendarmerie Nationale, France, in 2007, the process for which is described by Gaudry and Dourel [ 66 ], focussing on preparation of documentation on good working standards and introduction of a quality assurance system. A thorough discussion of mandatory certification of forensic scientists in general from a United States perspective was provided by Melbourn et al [ 67 ].…”

Section: Research and Casework—a Mutually Beneficial Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relationship between Research and Casework in Forensic Entomology

Hall

2021

Insects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research is a vital component of all forensic sciences and is often stimulated by casework, which identifies gaps in our knowledge. In such a niche area of forensic science as entomology there should be a close and mutually beneficial relationship between research and casework: to some extent there is a continuum between the two and many forensic entomologists are involved in both to a greater or lesser degree. However, research and casework involve quite differing challenges, from the replicated, highly controlled, sometimes esoteric aspects of research to the very individual, sometimes chaotic and disruptive, but highly applied aspects of casework. Ideally casework will include the full involvement of a forensic entomologist, who will collect the insect and climate evidence at the scene and produce a robust expert witness statement based on a full analysis of this data. Unfortunately, it can also include situations where samples, if collected at all, are poorly preserved, not representative of the full cadaver fauna available and presented to the entomologist months or years after the event, without local temperature data. While research is recognised through publications and their citation indices, casework and its associated expert witness statements often receive no credit in an academic workplace, although they do have a positive societal impact and many other benefits of teaching and public engagement value. This manuscript examines the relationship between research and casework from a UK perspective, to raise awareness of the need to create an environment that values the contribution of both, for future generations to flourish in both areas.

show abstract

Mandatory certification of forensic science practitioners in the United States: A supportive perspective

Cited by 6 publications

References 6 publications

Legal basis for the participation of an expert in the proceedings of the Russian Federation and the United States of America

Legal basis for the participation of an expert in the proceedings of the Russian Federation and the United States of America

Interpol review of forensic management, 2019–2022

The Relationship between Research and Casework in Forensic Entomology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About