Literature DB >> 15112598

Forensic hair morphology comparison--a dying art or junk science?

J M Taupin1.   

Abstract

There has been debate in both the judicial and forensic fields concerning the admissibility and reliability of the so-called forensic comparison sciences such as handwriting, tool mark analyses, and hair analysis. In particular, there has been increasing controversy over the use and interpretation of hair comparison evidence and it has been held partly responsible for miscarriages of justice. There has also been a perceived devaluation of the worth of microscopic human hair analysis particularly since the advent of DNA profiling. This article will attempt to initiate discussion on the past, current and future role of forensic human hair analysis and comparison.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15112598     DOI: 10.1016/S1355-0306(04)71695-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Justice        ISSN: 1355-0306            Impact factor:   2.124


  3 in total

1.  Judging experts: Australian magistrates' evaluations of expert opinion quality.

Authors:  Kristy A Martire; Bronte Montgomery-Farrer
Journal:  Psychiatr Psychol Law       Date:  2020-05-05

2.  Proteomic analysis of hair shafts from monozygotic twins: Expression profiles and genetically variant peptides.

Authors:  Pei-Wen Wu; Katelyn E Mason; Blythe P Durbin-Johnson; Michelle Salemi; Brett S Phinney; David M Rocke; Glendon J Parker; Robert H Rice
Journal:  Proteomics       Date:  2017-06-23       Impact factor: 3.984

3.  Human hair shaft proteomic profiling: individual differences, site specificity and cuticle analysis.

Authors:  Chelsea N Laatsch; Blythe P Durbin-Johnson; David M Rocke; Sophie Mukwana; Abby B Newland; Michael J Flagler; Michael G Davis; Richard A Eigenheer; Brett S Phinney; Robert H Rice
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2014-08-05       Impact factor: 2.984

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.