Archive for September, 2009
This should help increase blood alcohol casework…
by Forensic Scientist on Sep.29, 2009, under News, Opinion
The article below was published by the BBC today and it deals with the release by a brewery of a beer that contains 18.2% alcohol by volume. Over the years I have written reports for thousands of drink driving cases. I also spent 8 years at University and many months travelling around overseas. All in all, I’ve seen alot of alcohol consumed and encountered alot of casework involving alcohol. In my experience, people do not consider whether or not a drink contains a high alcohol content when it comes to deciding whether or not to drink it. In fact, the higher the alcohol content, the greater the desire to see how much can be consumed. Rather than slowing down people’s drinking, I can imagine that this beer will have people drinking it to see how much they can manage, particularly in a country of drinkers like Britain – hey presto, successful marketing campaign! Although the brewery says that this beer will encourage people to drink less, because the beer has a higher alcohol content the consumer will still ingest the same weight of alcohol and will still end up totally trollied. It means that less actual volume of liquid will be consumed but people will still get drunk because that’s what they want to do – this is just a novelty way of doing it. There was a big fuss like this when alcopops first hit the market (think of Two Dogs). Still, I guess that if this drink is limited in production then it’ll soon be drunk and the problem will fade…until the next time.
Brewery’s Nanny State beer swipe |
||||
A brewery has launched a low alcohol beer called Nanny State after being branded irresponsible for creating the UK’s “strongest beer”. Scottish brewer BrewDog, of Fraserburgh, was criticised for Tokyo* which has an alcohol content of 18.2%. Campaigners welcomed the 1.1% alcohol Nanny State but said the name showed a lack of appreciation of the problem The 3,000 limited edition bottles of Tokyo* contained six units of alcohol – twice the recommended daily limit. The company had insisted the £9.99 high strength beer would help tackle the country’s binge-drinking culture, because customers would drink it in smaller quantities.
But Alcohol Focus Scotland had branded that argument “deluded”. BrewDog founder James Watt explained on his blog: “Anyone who knows BrewDog, knows beer, or anyone has more common sense than a common (or garden) gnome will know that the scathing and unrelenting criticism we faced was pretty unjustified. “If logic serves the same people who witch-hunted and publicly slated us should now offer us heartfelt support and public congratulations. “However I fear that this, unfortunately, is an arena devoid of logic and reason.” Nanny State is described as a “mild imperial ale containing more hops per barrel than any other beer ever brewed in the UK”.
It is being made available in limited quantities online for £2.49. Jack Law, chief executive of Alcohol Focus Scotland, said of the new Nanny State beer: “This is a positive move which proves that low strength doesn’t compromise quality. “However the name of the beer proves that once again this company is failing to acknowledge the seriousness of the alcohol problem facing Scotland.” BrewDog previously ran into controversy when drinks industry watchdog the Portman Group said its Speedball drink should be withdrawn from sale until its marketing was changed. Speedballing is the name given to combining heroin and cocaine. |
||||
The name of the beer proves that once again this company is failing to acknowledge the seriousness of the alcohol problem facing Scotland 
Michael Crichton – Next
by Forensic Scientist on Sep.25, 2009, under Opinion
An extract from Michael Crichton’s Next, 2006:
“The ultimate lesson is that science isn’t special – at least not anymore. Maybe back when Einstein talked to Niels Bohr, and there were only a few dozen important workers in every field. But there are now three million researchers in America. It’s no longer a calling, it’s a career. Science is as corruptible a human activity as any other. Its practitioners aren’t saints, they’re human beings, and they do what human beings do – lie, cheat, steal from one another, sue, hide data, fake data, overstate their own importance and denigrate opposing views unfairly. That’s human nature. It isn’t going to change.”
Cold case review solves 30 year old murder
by Forensic Scientist on Sep.25, 2009, under News
There has been quite a bit of adverse publicity recently surrounding the reliability of forensic science, including DNA (consider: the US review of forensic science; the use, or not, of LCN DNA in the UK; the execution of a Texas man for a murder for which he was later found not to be guilty) this is a nice example of how cold case review can be successful. It also gives a hint of the number of people on the UK DNA database and the number of people who are on the database but do not have a criminal conviction. The second article describes how DNA can be extracted from exhumed remains in order to obtain a sample for analysis.
“Evidence from murderer’s body were the key
A full crime scene DNA profile of the 22-year-old Teresa’s murder in a pub car park was developed as part of a case review. Experts at the Forensic Science Service were able to test samples taken from killer David Lace’s body after it was dramatically exhumed from Kingston Cemetery in New Road, Copnor, last month. The News understands the rigorous scientific tests involved the grim process of taking samples of bone or teeth from Lace’s remains, sanding or airblasting them to remove any contamination and then painstakingly extracting the DNA to enable a profile to be created. Lace’s profile was checked against samples taken from the original crime scene at the rear of the Tom Tackle pub in Commercial Road, Southampton. Results showed there is a one-in-a-billion chance of Lace not being responsible for her death. The profile also matched that of Lace’s sister held on the National DNA Database.
Detective Chief Inspector Phil McTavish, who lead the fresh investigation, said: ‘At the time (of the murder], all detectives had to go on was blood groups. ‘Now we had the DNA profile, we could start the elimination process in line with the background research of the case papers we were reviewing at the same time. ‘The Forensic Science Service looked across the DNA database to find a match. The database threw up 30,000 results. A lot of people on the DNA database don’t have criminal records. It was a process where we used some focussed research to focus on the most likely matches. We found a match with a sibling, a sister of his. Combined with the evidence gathered on the case papers, we sought approval from the Ministry of Justice to exhume David Lace’s grave.’
Hampshire Constabulary is ‘fully satisfied’ that the person exhumed from Kingston Cemetery was David Lace and that his DNA profile is a complete match for that of the suspect. DCI McTavish said: ‘A match probability of one-in-one-billion has been given which basically means that the chances of obtaining a similar match from a person selected at random is of the order of one-in-one-billion. He added: ‘The DNA result together with a full file of evidence has been submitted to Mr Alistair Nisbet of the Crown Prosecution Service for review and it has been determined that, had David Lace been alive today then there is a realistic prospect that a jury would properly conclude that he raped and murdered Teresa de Simone on December 5, 1979. ‘Accordingly, if he was alive, Mr Nisbet would authorise that David Lace would be charged and prosecution commenced. As a consequence of this decision and, taken together with the outcome of the extensive investigations we have undertaken, we are satisfied that we have identified the man responsible for the murder and rape of Teresa de Simone and we are not seeking any other person in relation to this case. Additionally, we are not currently linking David Lace to any other undetected serious crime.”
Science behind the revelations
Update on US review of forensic science
by Forensic Scientist on Sep.25, 2009, under News
From dotmed.com
“Senate Judiciary Committee Holds Hearing on Strengthening Forensic Science
The U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary recently held a further hearing on problems in forensic science. The hearing continues the investigation from March of this year on the standards of forensic science, which focused on a February National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report detailing the need to establish and enforce best practices in forensics. That report had noted problems in labs including lack of strong scientific research, adequate resources and support, and lack of a unified regulation of crime labs and practitioners.
Chairman of the Committee Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) began the current hearing by acknowledging the importance of the scientific advancements developed through forensics, including the ability to demonstrate criminal guilt or exonerate those who are innocent of crimes. “We need to do all we can to ensure that forensic science rises to the highest scientific standards and has the maximum possible reliability,” Senator Leahy said.
The senator then pointed out that the Committee has continued to hear information about severe problems in the field, even a case of a possibly innocent man executed due to a conviction based in part on forensic testimony and evidence. (It was the case of Cameron Todd Willingham, executed in Texas in 2004, whose trial for arson-murder involved forensic evidence and interpretation of alleged arson indicators). Senator Leahy recognized the recent Supreme Court decision of Melendez-Diaz vs. Massachusetts, which held that forensic examiners must present their evidence in court and be subject to cross-examination, rather than just submitting reports of their findings.
Senator Leahy also described the disparity between television’s “CSI” effect–implying that all forensics are infallible and well-funded, when in actuality (according to statistics from the Department of Justice) the backlog of forensic exams in 2005 was up 24 percent from just three years earlier. In addition, one out of every five labs does not meet National Academy of Crime Lab Director standards for accreditation.
Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI) also discussed problems in the field including scandals in crime labs and unsupported scientific conclusions being presented at trial by expert witnesses. Ironically, Sen. Feingold explained, DNA testing–one of the most reliable of forensic tests, has exposed the flaws of other areas of forensic science. In spite of that fact, Feingold said jurors still place inordinate weight on forensic evidence in the courtroom, even when not reliable.
The witnesses at the hearing included Eric Buel, Ph.D., Director, Vermont Forensic Laboratory Vermont Department of Public Safety. Dr. Buel testified on the importance of quality assurance in forensic science. He agreed with the NAS report that all laboratories performing forensic science should be accredited–including staff certification facilitated through a process determined by an existing national organization. Dr. Buel stated that while the vast majority of forensic labs are accredited, there are still thousands of forensic service providers housed in local law enforcement agencies and not accredited. Dr. Buel said the process of accrediting all forensic service providers will require much effort and significant changes in staffing, as well as on-site inspections and reviews to insure compliance. Labs should institute methods meeting strict scientific scrutiny and a national level of standardization to ensure the same application across the country. Nonetheless, he emphasized that standardization of methods, protocols, and reports should be a national priority.
Another witness, Peter Neufeld, co-director of the Innocence Project (affiliated with the Cardozo School of Law), testified that many of commonly used forensic methods (other than DNA) have not been scientifically validated, and currently no formal means to validate new forensic technologies exist. The current techniques Mr. Neufeld states are not validated include hair microscopy, bite mark comparisons, latent fingerprint comparisons, firearm/tool mark analysis and shoe and tire print comparisons. In addition, he said there is little research on the limits or measures of performances of these techniques to address variability and inadvertent bias. By comparison, Neufeld says, applied sciences including medicine and engineering routinely involve such research as well as comprehensive reviews by conflict-free entities including the Food and Drug Administration. Mr. Neufeld noted also that problems exist in the field in occasions of imprecise or exaggerated expert report writing and testimony.
By contrast, Neufeld explained that DNA-typing analytical methods were scientifically validated before even being used for criminal investigation, including the National Academy of Sciences using two reviews of data to set standards for interpretation and limits on what analysts can say about DNA results. Forensic DNA testing was developed under a process similar to the testing given medical devices.
However, another witness testified that the severe criticism of the forensics field is unjustified. Barry Matson, Deputy Director of the Alabama District Attorneys Association and the Chief Prosecutor for the Alabama Computer Forensic Laboratories agreed that some “regrettable incidences” have happened in forensic settings but was emphatic that these incidences were not to the level that projects such as the NAS report indicated. He stated that the NAS report erroneously focused on perceived biases in the forensics and law enforcement communities. Mr. Matson also testified that the NAS report has had distinct negative impact on prosecutors in previous convictions, and current prosecutions now being challenged by the information in the NAS report.
The Hearing testimony can be accessed at: http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/hearing.cfm?id=4038″
Forensic Science Service IT overhaul
by Forensic Scientist on Sep.25, 2009, under News
Assuming this report is accurate, the first thing that springs to mind are the 800 job losses that are expected at the Forensic Science Service.
“UK Forensics has £3 million IT overhaul
September 23, 2009, sourcingfocus.com
Britain’s Forensic Science Service (FSS) is said to have experienced an increase in efficiency and cost-effectiveness as a result of the recent work conducted by Capgemini UK plc.
The FSS, a government-owned company, is the market leader in the supply of forensic services to police forces in England and Wales and has a global reputation for excellence in the development and deployment of new and advanced techniques. It pioneered the use of DNA technologies and paved the way for the establishment of the world’s first DNA database, launched in April 1995.
Capgemini has upgraded the organisation’s core SAP system, installed a new costing and monitoring system and processed a new management information system for better visibility of customer service and financial outcomes.
The FSS gave the contract to Capgemini following a procurement process that involved more than 20 national and international bidders. Development staff from India working delivered the services from the FSS HQ in Birmingham.
Mark Lowther, Director of Information and Communications Technology at the FSS, said: “Capgemini’s sparkling expertise in SAP technology has given us a new level of control over the cost and progress of every investigation we undertake, enabling us to become more efficient and competitive, and to provide even better service to our customers.”
Capgemini is continuing to work on IT projects at the FSS. Current assignments include a new IT-based system to improve the efficiency of tracking exhibits along their journey from crime scene to courtroom, and a new strategic business and financial planning system.”