HOW TO FIND A FORENSIC SCIENCE EXPERT If you wanted to find a forensic science expert where would you start looking? You could: Which of the following attributes of your chosen forensic science expert are important? So you find yourself in that possibly once per career situation of needing an expert. No easy matter, bearing in mind that the number of topics upon which the Legal Profession may need to consult experts is extraordinary - anything from acoustics to welding, with forensic science somewhere between. GETTING TO THE SHORTLIST To get a list of potential experts (and this applies generally, not just to forensic scientists) the solicitor has a number of routes open. The wise solicitor, however, will treat circumspectly the advice that is given, for there are a number of pitfalls to be faced from each source. Professional Bodies The value of some experts will be apparent from the professional qualifications they hold. Professional bodies such as the Institute of Chartered Surveyors have well-established and documented standards set down for their members. Other experts may be more difficult to assess, especially those in areas of expertise where there are no official regulating bodies or recognised qualifications. There have been a number of recent well-meaning attempts to resolve these situations which have, in some notable cases, only served to make things more difficult. Specifically in forensic science, the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice recommended that the discipline looked to finding a way of regulating itself. Whereas the vast majority of genuine forensic scientists would be only too happy for this to happen there has been virtually no progress in doing this outside the major forensic science laboratories. Whilst not wishing to suggest that there are no problems in the standards of service offered by the recognised laboratories it is true to say that they are the ones least in need of regulation. At least the performance of these scientists is regularly assessed and subject to continual peer review. Academies, Directories And Expert Supplements The solicitor may consult one of the proliferating Expert Directories or the special Expert supplements. Or he may consult that apparent font of all things 'expert', the Academy of Experts. Expert witness supplements should be treated with great caution. They are, in essence, sources of advertising revenue for the parent publication. The expert pays the asking rate and puts in his advert. In spite of the apparent informed nature of these publications there is not the slightest attempt to check that any of the claims made by the advertisers can be substantiated. They may give the solicitor some telephone numbers to ring but then it's down to asking the right questions. Some Directories and the Academy of Experts do claim to offer vetting procedures. However, in each case these are flawed because they only require references from one or two satisfied lawyers. Nothing the matter with lawyers but are they the appropriate people to assess experts? Lawyers would understandably resist the notion that their profession be qualified by forensic scientists, for example ! FINAL SELECTION OF THE EXPERT Now that you have a shortlist how do you assess the true capability of the expert? First, remind yourself what the role of the expert is. The expert is there to say what the issues are, to weigh the evidence and explain the significance of facts and observations and to express clear, concise and unambiguous conclusions. The expert is not there to fight your corner, nor to strengthen your prejudices; the expert is not a 'hired gun'. You still have the right (and duty to your client) to satisfy yourself on a number of points. And there are yet more pitfalls in the area of forensic science. Qualifications And Relevant Expertise A good forensic scientist will have an appropriate period of training in a recognised forensic laboratory. Make sure they have some good basic scientific qualifications and that they have undergone an appropriate period of training in a recognised forensic science laboratory. Make sure, too, that their training is relevant. Many of the independent forensic science laboratories employ former staff of the recognised laboratories. A CV with 'twenty years in the Home Office Forensic Science Laboratory...' looks very impressive but if those twenty years were spent in the Biology Section you won't want this expert giving evidence on ballistics, toolmarks or handwriting. And then there is the problem of the entirely unqualified individual who seeks to appear as an expert but whose experience is spurious or inappropriate. One of the worst examples of this happening is the field of forensic document examination. The scientist in this discipline identifies individuals by their handwriting, authenticates signatures and identifies simulations and has appropriate equipment to study not only these problems but a wide range of other questioned document problems suck as inks, typewriting, indented impressions, alterations, photocopies and the products of modern office technology. The discipline has recently been invaded by a group of people who often describe themselves as 'handwriting analysts' but who are actually graphologists. Graphology is the pseudo-science of divining personality from handwriting and is occasionally used by personnel departments as an excuse for choosing one candidate over another; it is neither an accepted expertise in a Court of Law or an acceptable alternative for forensic science. Equipment A good forensic scientist will be fully equipped for the job. Look for investment in equipment, training and support facilities in your chosen expert. The major laboratories are well-equipped but there are too many independent experts who believe that they can do the same job with a magnifying glass on their kitchen table. Try offering to hold a conference at their laboratory. Quality Assurance A good forensic scientist will operate an independently or peer-assessed quality management system. Quality standards have an advantage of ensuring that correct and appropriate procedures are used on every occasion. Quality standards also require regular monitoring and documentation of failures in a manner which ensures that they are not repeated. Only some of the official laboratories and one or two of the similar private laboratories have attained such quality certification. Even the Forensic Science Service, which is the largest employer of forensic scientists in the country, has some considerable way to go before the methods of regulation which they have incorporated into their working methods can be really viewed as independent and effective. One of the major problems in forensic science is that you can have perfect methodology but the results can still be wrongly interpreted. It is extremely difficult to assess the ability of an individual to interpret data correctly and assess evidence accurately. CLEANING THE ACT UP FOR THE FUTURE Having been critical of the minefield through which the hapless solicitor must wander to find an appropriate forensic expert here are a few thoughts on how the situation could be improved. Peer Review It should not be left to lawyers, either inside or outside the Court, to assess the suitability of an expert. I am continually amazed by their lack of critical assessment in this area. In my own field of forensic document examination I have seen people disguising their lack of training by offering such qualifications as 'Member of the Royal Institution'. A telephone call would be sufficient to ascertain that membership of the Royal Institution is open to anyone with an interest in science on payment of a small membership fee. Until proper peer review is put in place Directories or Academies cannot be relied upon to give an adequate assessment of anyone claiming expertise. More Demanding Courts The Courts rarely give the appearance of being interested in attempting to qualify the expert. To a large extent they seem willing to listen to anything. Largely, the reason why unqualified experts are giving evidence in our Courts of Law is that the Courts permit them to do so. Our Courts will continue to hear poor quality expert evidence until they make some demands that the standards are improved. It's not as if appropriate advice is not available either. The UK Forensic Science Service is recognised worldwide. It sets the standards for itself in all areas of forensic science. Courts should expect any independent practitioners to be offering a similar standard both of qualification and facilities. Whilst it would be entirely inappropriate for these laboratories to comment on individual's expertise they could be consulted to advise on general standards of training, qualification and laboratory facilities. In the meantime it is down to the individual solicitor to do a bit of background research and to ask the appropriate questions. Counsel could ask a few of them in Court as well. Dr Audrey Giles, B.Sc., Phd. Tel : 01494 726784 Fax : 01494 724076 |
||