SSRN Electronic Journal,
Год журнала:
2022,
Номер
unknown
Опубликована: Янв. 1, 2022
Error
rates
in
studies
of
forensic
firearms
performance
have
typically
been
extremely
small.
Such
challenged,
however,
as
misinterpreting
one
the
categories—Inconclusive—that
examiners
can
reach..
These
challenges
themselves
challenged.
How
to
consider
inconclusives
and
their
effect
on
error
is
currently
a
matter
sharp
debate.
We
review
several
alternative
viewpoints
,
then
examine
impact
from
three
fresh
statistical
perspectives.
Our
conclusions
vary
with
perspective:
Inconclusives
be
simple
errors;
need
not
counted
errors
bring
into
doubt
assessments
rates;
are
potential
errors,
masking
casework.
From
all
perspectives,
it
impossible
simply
read
out
estimates
those
which
carried
date.
The
much
larger
than
nominal
reported
studies.
The
National
Institute
of
Justice
(NIJ)
and
the
Forensic
Technology
Center
Excellence,
an
NIJ
program
hosted
a
four-day
symposium,
January
11–14,
2022.
symposium
included
presentations
panel
discussions
on
topics
relevant
to
recent
advances
in
firearm
toolmark
examination
with
focus
future.
brought
together
685
criminal
justice
processionals
explore
implementation
three-dimensional
(3D)
imaging
technologies,
best
practices
for
forensic
evidence,
federal
initiatives,
gun
crime
intelligence,
black
box
studies
examination,
legal
challenges
admissibility
current
evidence
engineering
solutions
that
will
be
used
court
future,
Organization
Scientific
Area
Committee
(OSAC)
standards
reporting,
uniform
language
testimony
conclusion
scales.
provided
examples
how
agencies
implement
new
technologies
firearms
incorporate
statistics
add
weight
comparisons,
address
issues,
operationalize
intelligence
improve
public
safety
share
information
community.
also
platform
discuss
series
considerations
forensic,
law
enforcement,
greater
community
could
help
support
successful
national
transition
accelerate
adoption
examination.
SSRN Electronic Journal,
Год журнала:
2022,
Номер
unknown
Опубликована: Янв. 1, 2022
Error
rates
in
studies
of
forensic
firearms
performance
have
typically
been
extremely
small.
Such
challenged,
however,
as
misinterpreting
one
the
categories—Inconclusive—that
examiners
can
reach..
These
challenges
themselves
challenged.
How
to
consider
inconclusives
and
their
effect
on
error
is
currently
a
matter
sharp
debate.
We
review
several
alternative
viewpoints
,
then
examine
impact
from
three
fresh
statistical
perspectives.
Our
conclusions
vary
with
perspective:
Inconclusives
be
simple
errors;
need
not
counted
errors
bring
into
doubt
assessments
rates;
are
potential
errors,
masking
casework.
From
all
perspectives,
it
impossible
simply
read
out
estimates
those
which
carried
date.
The
much
larger
than
nominal
reported
studies.
