Before DNA testing, prosecutors relied on less sophisticated forensic techniques, including microscopic hair analysis, to put criminals behind bars. But how reliable was hair analysis?

Get our weekly newsletter

Flawed Evidence: The Limits of Science in the Crime Lab

In the late 1980s, DNA technology upended the world of forensics. Genetic fingerprinting, as it was often called, was a powerful tool to win convictions, but it also revealed cracks in the criminal justice system: innocent people were in prison. And many of them had been convicted in part using older forensic techniques, including microscopic hair analysis.

Before DNA, when a hair was found at a crime scene, it was examined under a microscope and compared with hairs from a suspect. Though crime lab analysts knew that two hairs couldn’t be matched with perfect accuracy, hair comparisons proved to be powerful evidence linking suspects to crimes. In court, some examiners and prosecutors were certain that they had a “match.” But DNA exonerations are now forcing the criminal justice system to confront the limitations of hair analysis.

An Overturned Conviction Magnifies Flaws in a Discredited Forensic Technique by Anny Oberlink


More on the Story

Judge orders D.C. to pay $13.2 million in wrongful FBI hair conviction caseThe Washington Post
FBI admits flaws in hair analysis over decadesThe Washington Post
How DNA Forever Changed Forensic ScienceThe Takeaway
Related Coverage
DNA Analysis Exposes Flaws in an Inexact Forensic ScienceThe New York Times
Flawed Forensics Still a FactorThe Innocence Project
From Hair to DNA Analysis, How Crime Forensics ChangedChannel Nonfiction