Michael J. Saks
Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology
Arizona State University

In recent years, almost everything about the forensic individualization sciences has been called into question - except their importance. The concerns raised have pointed to long-standing but empirically untested beliefs, heavy reliance on the subjective judgement of individual examiners, the need for rigour in the management of uncertainty (that is, development and use of proper probability models) where past tradition has relied on an excessive faith in uniqueness and certainty, and the vulnerability of examiners to the influence of examination-irrelevant information (suggesting the need for blind examination protocols). Post-mortems of DNA-exoneration cases have found forensic science errors to rival eyewitness identification as a major cause of erroneous convictions. Investigative commissions in the U.S. have turned their focus from errors in particular cases, to unscientific practices in whole units within labs, to fundamental weaknesses in the foundations of various fields. This talk aims to explain the concerns outlined above and to suggest directions that research and practice might take to remedy those concerns. The concerns that have been raised are at bottom about the need for empirical testing, and for practices that reflect what is learned from such research. Because the forensic identification sciences are of such importance, the goals of reformers and defenders alike should all be – and are – directed at improvement: in solidifying scientific foundations, in developing empirically derived standards to guide practitioners, in training, and in examination practices.

Michael J. Saks is Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology at the Arizona State University, and a fellow of the Center for the Study of Law, Science, and Technology. He holds a Ph.D. (experimental social psychology) from Ohio State University (1975) and an M.S.L. from Yale Law School (1983). He has taught at the University of Iowa (where he held the Edward F. Howrey chair), Boston College, Ohio State University, Georgetown University, and has taught courses for judges at the University of Virginia, Duke University, and the National Judicial College at Reno. He also has been on staff at the National Center for State Courts. He was editor of LAW & HUMAN BEHAVIOR, JURIMETRICS (the journal of the American Bar Association section of science and technology), MODERN SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE (a multi-volume treatise), and many other works. His research focuses on empirical studies of the legal system, especially decision-making; the behavior of the litigation system; and the law’s use of science. His work has earned a number of awards and been cited in a number of judicial opinions, including by the United States Supreme Court.