Forensic Science is an end-to-end process beginning at the scene and finishing in court. There are many opportunities for quality failures along the way. To limit the focus to the validity and robustness of the actual tests does not support the contribution of forensic science to the criminal justice system and risks compromising it. A particularly critical aspect of the process is the interpretation of the significance of the test findings in the context of the case. Standards developed by the Association of Forensic Science Providers (AFSP) for evaluative expert opinion are introduced as a safeguard to ensuring that the opinions are balanced and logical and transparent as well as the testing being robust. The complexity of internal laboratory processes as well as the lack of clear boundaries between the scene and the laboratory makes forensic science a complex area of management. Confusing it with a clinical model of testing is misleading and unlikely to use the potential of forensic science to support the criminal justice system.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brown et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: