Laying claim to the experts
A case out of Minnesota demonstrates the problems with using forensic scientists in criminal cases. 17 year old Nicole Beecroft was charged with stabbing her newborn daughter to death. The defense claimed the baby was stillborn, so there could be no murder. The issue was basically a medical one, so the trial came down to a battle of forensic experts. The defense had several, including Dr. Susan Roe, who is assistant medical examiner for 8 Minnesota counties. Apparently the prosecutor considered Dr. Roe his property, so he took offense at Dr. Roe not agreeing with him. So he did what any good prosecutor does, which is use the power of his office to threaten her. Apparently, he doesn't deny it. According to an ABA article:
During the Beecroft trial, Dakota County Attorney James Backstrom—head prosecutor in one of the eight counties for which Roe works—admitted sending an e-mail to Dr. Lindsey Thomas, Roe’s boss at the Minnesota Regional Medical Examin er’s Office in Hastings. Backstrom told Thomas she could lose her county job if she or her assistants continued to do defense work against his wishes and the county sheriff’s wishes.
Roe took the threat seriously - she hired a lawyer and left the state until the trial was over.
Such a threat should not be a surprise. According the article, it is common for forensic experts to be criticized for assisting the defense. Everywhere else scientists are expected to be impartial; any allegation of partiality can destroy a career. Not so in the criminal justice arena; prosecutors believe you are either for us or against us. Of course, this is part of a bigger problem - prosecutors refusing to admit they might be wrong. That's another blog post though.
The problem with mixing science and criminal justice is that the scientists become advocates. Even if they believe themselves neutral, the party using them certainly doesn't. And the fact is, forensic scientists don't stay neutral long. It's a natural tendency - you start to like and trust the people you work with. If you are working with prosecutors and police every day, their attitudes are going to rub enough. If you nothing else, you give them the benefit of the doubt - even if it they aren't aware of it.
I've written before about the distorting effects of bias. It's unavoidable, especially when crime labs are linked to the police and prosecutors. It's time we get away from that model, and establish independent crime labs. While it might not solve all the problems, it least it will do away the threats unethical prosecutors like Mr. Backstrom seem all too willing to make.
