Citation

STS and Forensic Science Problems: Expertise in Legal Context

Abstract | Word Stems | Keywords | Association | Citation | Similar Titles



Abstract:

In recent years, and accelerating after the release of the NAS’s Strengthening the Path Forward report in 2009, a scandal has engulfed the forensic sciences in the US and beyond. Many commentators (such as the critics Saks, Faigman, Koehler and Thompson), and even STS scholars (though not Lynch, Jasanoff or Mercer), have drawn upon idealised and normatively-charged models of science as part of their suite of responses to endemic and apparently serious problems with the forensic sciences, particularly the non-DNA comparison sciences. STS-trained commentators (such as Cole, Mnookin and Edmond) have tended to marginalise the value of experience and tacit knowledge in understanding and reforming forensic science practice. Perhaps surprisingly, they have also recommended the need for testing and validation studies, peer review, and even the cultivation of a more scientific culture among (some) forensic scientists. For some (including Edmond and Cole), who have been critical of Daubert and/or legal models of science, these responses appear to be inconsistent with some of their published writings, notably those written for STS and humanities audiences. In this paper, I will endeavour to provide a robust defence of these responses and ongoing interventions that is sensitive to legal principle and STS theorising. While this defence may not satisfy all of the commentators, especially those lacking sympathy for STS and HPS approaches to expertise, it does offer a credible platform to advance theorising STS interventions in the criminal justice system and for thinking about how commentators might begin to re-conceptualise their interventions in the civil justice sphere.
Convention
Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

Association:
Name: 4S Annual Meeting - Abstract and Session Submissions
URL:
http://www.4sonline.org


Citation:
URL: http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p519913_index.html
Direct Link:
HTML Code:

MLA Citation:

Edmond, Gary. "STS and Forensic Science Problems: Expertise in Legal Context" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 4S Annual Meeting - Abstract and Session Submissions, Crowne Plaza Cleveland City Center Hotel, Cleveland, OH, <Not Available>. 2014-11-25 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p519913_index.html>

APA Citation:

Edmond, G. "STS and Forensic Science Problems: Expertise in Legal Context" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 4S Annual Meeting - Abstract and Session Submissions, Crowne Plaza Cleveland City Center Hotel, Cleveland, OH <Not Available>. 2014-11-25 from http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p519913_index.html

Publication Type: Abstract
Abstract: In recent years, and accelerating after the release of the NAS’s Strengthening the Path Forward report in 2009, a scandal has engulfed the forensic sciences in the US and beyond. Many commentators (such as the critics Saks, Faigman, Koehler and Thompson), and even STS scholars (though not Lynch, Jasanoff or Mercer), have drawn upon idealised and normatively-charged models of science as part of their suite of responses to endemic and apparently serious problems with the forensic sciences, particularly the non-DNA comparison sciences. STS-trained commentators (such as Cole, Mnookin and Edmond) have tended to marginalise the value of experience and tacit knowledge in understanding and reforming forensic science practice. Perhaps surprisingly, they have also recommended the need for testing and validation studies, peer review, and even the cultivation of a more scientific culture among (some) forensic scientists. For some (including Edmond and Cole), who have been critical of Daubert and/or legal models of science, these responses appear to be inconsistent with some of their published writings, notably those written for STS and humanities audiences. In this paper, I will endeavour to provide a robust defence of these responses and ongoing interventions that is sensitive to legal principle and STS theorising. While this defence may not satisfy all of the commentators, especially those lacking sympathy for STS and HPS approaches to expertise, it does offer a credible platform to advance theorising STS interventions in the criminal justice system and for thinking about how commentators might begin to re-conceptualise their interventions in the civil justice sphere.


Similar Titles:
Conceptualization of Privacy in Chinese Legal Context and Current Legal Framework for the Protection of Online Privacy

Legal Problems, Legal Needs: The Legal Assistance Gap Facing Lower Income People in New Jersey

Different contexts, same problems? Structural issues for religious education in transnational contexts: Scotland and Malawi as cases

Why Natural Science Method IsInappropriate for Political Science: The Problem of Self-DisconfirmingAnalysis

Preservice Science Teachers’ Opinions related to Context Based Learning and Eligible Contexts: A Longitudinal Study


 
All Academic, Inc. is your premier source for research and conference management. Visit our website, www.allacademic.com, to see how we can help you today.