Flawed Evidence: The Limits of Science in the Crime Lab
- Producers:
- Scott Michels
- Kit R. Roane
- Editors:
- Hope Litoff
- Anne Alvergue
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.
More Like This
The Modern Bystander Effect
Why don’t people intervene when they encounter violence streaming live online?
DNA Clues Solve Crimes . . . With a Privacy Cost
DNA information that is available on genealogy websites is doing more than satisfying curiosity -- it's solving crimes.
Are Robots Really Taking Over?
Humans are wary that robots could replace them. So what can we learn from the legendary chess match between a supercomputer and Garry Kasparov?
Online All the Time? Researchers Predicted It.
Our social media addiction is explained by theories pioneered by B.F. Skinner decades ago.