物证鉴定错误减少对策研究
|
摘要
物证鉴定若存在错误风险则会危害严重。恰当的物证鉴定错误管理可以有效减少物证鉴定错误的发生,有助于及时发现物证鉴定错误并将损害减至最小。本文探讨了在物证鉴定全部过程中有效管理物证鉴定错误的十二条措施:1)以有组织方式有条理的开展物证发现、提取、标记、记录、包装、保存和送检工作;2)持续强化物证鉴定科学基础研究和方法确认;3)在物证鉴定检验过程中实施多人平行鉴定、技术评审和管理审核程序;4)建立透明的鉴定意见冲突解决和鉴定结论表述机制;5)采用适当程序和方法有效管理和控制物证鉴定认知偏见信息;6)实施物证鉴定结论例行核查机制;7)建立检验留样和全面记录机制;8)有效评估物证鉴定结论错误风险;9)建立有效的用户培训和交流机制;10)及时发现和整改物证鉴定错误;11)构建物证鉴定科学文化;12)加强物证鉴定人培训。
Forensic error, when existing and even causing risks, will do very likely a lot of harm to the criminal justice system. Suitable forensic error management can be effectively reducing the error generating, timely detecting the error, and even lowering the error-incurred damage to minimum. This article will inquire into the strategies to mitigate forensic error by implementing a dozen of relevant measures. 1) To systematically and orderly carry out evidence discovering, collecting, labeling, recording, packaging, preserving and submitting. 2) To continually strengthen the researches on forensic science basis and validation of methods used in forensic laboratory. 3) To adopt the procedures of paralleling multiple examiners, technical review and administrative evaluation. 4) To establish a transparent conflict-resolution policy for settling disagreements in technical decision from examiners. 5) To effectively manage and control the biasing information in forensic analysis. 6) To carry out the procedure of regularly checking cases files in order to search/avoid error. 7) To create and run a procedure of both retaining evidential samples and completely documenting the analytic process for renewing methods or peer review to assess the previous conclusion. 8) To evaluate the risk from forensic conclusion error. 9) To develop an effective mechanism for training and interchanging between forensic participators. 10) To timely detect/rectify forensic error. 11) To build up scientific culture among the forensic community. 12) To strengthen training and education of forensic examiners.
Forensic error, when existing and even causing risks, will do very likely a lot of harm to the criminal justice system. Suitable forensic error management can be effectively reducing the error generating, timely detecting the error, and even lowering the error-incurred damage to minimum. This article will inquire into the strategies to mitigate forensic error by implementing a dozen of relevant measures. 1) To systematically and orderly carry out evidence discovering, collecting, labeling, recording, packaging, preserving and submitting. 2) To continually strengthen the researches on forensic science basis and validation of methods used in forensic laboratory. 3) To adopt the procedures of paralleling multiple examiners, technical review and administrative evaluation. 4) To establish a transparent conflict-resolution policy for settling disagreements in technical decision from examiners. 5) To effectively manage and control the biasing information in forensic analysis. 6) To carry out the procedure of regularly checking cases files in order to search/avoid error. 7) To create and run a procedure of both retaining evidential samples and completely documenting the analytic process for renewing methods or peer review to assess the previous conclusion. 8) To evaluate the risk from forensic conclusion error. 9) To develop an effective mechanism for training and interchanging between forensic participators. 10) To timely detect/rectify forensic error. 11) To build up scientific culture among the forensic community. 12) To strengthen training and education of forensic examiners.
引文
[1]王桂强.物证鉴定错误问题研析[J].刑事技术,2017,42(6):431-440.
[2]National Research Council.Strengthening forensic science in the united states:a path forward[M].Washington:National Academy Press,2009.
[3]Presidents’Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.Forensic science in criminal courts:ensuring scientific validity of feature-comparison methods[R].Washington:PCAST,2016.
[4]BEATRICE S.The relationship between forensic science and judicial error:a study covering error sources,bias,and remedies[D].Lausanne:University of Lausanne,2009.
[5]花锋.法庭科学实验室认可及其对策[J].刑事技术,2003(3):3-6.
[6]王桂强.物证鉴定方法确认和标准操作程序[J].刑事技术,2006(6):3-8.
[7]BALLANTYNE K N,EDMOND G,FOUND B.Peer review in forensic science[J].Forensic Science International,2017,277:66–76.
[8]Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc 509 U.S.579,593[EB/OL].1993.https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-102.ZO.html
[9]KASSINA S M,DROR I E,KUKUCKA J.The forensic confirmation bias:problems,perspectives,and proposed solutions[J].Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition,2013,2(1):42–52.
[10]LANGENBURG G.A performance study of the ACE-V process:a pilot study to measure the accuracy,precision,reproducibility,repeatability,and bias-ability of conclusions resulting from the ACE-V process[J].Journal of Forensic Identification,2009,59:219–257.
[11]CAMPBELL A.The fingerprint inquiry report[R/OL].APS Group Scotland,Edinburgh Scotland,2011.http://www.thefingerprintinquiryscotland.org.uk/inquiry/3127-2.html
[12]WONG C,AHARONI E,ALIYEV G R,et al.The potential of blind collaborative justice[R/OL].The RAND Corporation,2015,https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248829.pdf
[13]GISCHE M.Disagreements in technical work[R/OL].Arlington,Virginia:the International Symposium on Forensic Science Error Management.2017.https://www.nist.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2017/08/23/melissagischethursdayafternoonsession.pdf
[14]National Commission of Forensic Science.View of the Commission on Report and Case Record Contents[R/OL].2016.https://www.justice.gov/archives/ncfs/page/file/865051/download
[15]DROR I E.Human expert performance in forensic decision making:seven different sources of bias[J].Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences,2017,49:541–547.
[16]DROR I E,MORGAN R,RANDO C,et al.The bias snowball and the bias cascade effects:two distinct biases that may impact forensic decision making[J].Journal of Forensic Science,2017,62(3):832–833.
[17]EDMOND G,TANGEN J,SSEARSTON R,et al.Contextual bias and cross-contamination in the forensic sciences:the corrosive implications for investigations,plea bargains,trials and appeals[J].Law,Probability and Risk,2015,14:1–25.
[18]DROR I E.MCCORMACK B M,Epstein J.Cognitive bias and its impact on expert witnesses and the court[J].The Judges’Journal,2015,54(4):8-14.
[19]Forensic Science Regulator.Guidance:cognitive bias effects relevant to forensic science examinations[R/OL].2015.https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/510147/217_FSR-G-217_Cognitive_bias_appendix.pdf
[20]National Commission on Forensic Science.Ensuring that forensic analysis is based upon task relevant information[R/OL].Washington(DC),2015.https://www.justice.gov/ncfs/file/818196/download
[21]MATTIJSSEN T,KERKHOFF W,BERGER H,et al Implementing context information management in forensic casework:Minimizing contextual bias in firearms examination[J].Science and Justice,2016,56:113–122.
[22]JEANGUENAT A M,BUDOWLE B,DROR I E.Strengthening forensic DNA decision making through a better understanding of the influence of cognitive bias[J].Science and Justice,2017,in Press.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2017.07.005
[23]KRANE D E,FORD S,GILDER J R,et al.Sequential unmasking:a means of minimizing observer effects in forensic dna interpretation[J].Journal of Forensic Science,2008,53:1006-1007.
[24]DROR I E,THOMPSON W C,MEISSNER C A,et al.Letter to the editor-context management toolbox:a linear sequential unmasking(LSU)approach for minimizing cognitive bias in forensic decision making[J].Journal of Forensic Science,2015,60:1111–1112.
[25]LANGENBYRG G.Addressing potential observer effects in forensic science:a perspective from a forensic scientist who uses linear sequential unmasking techniques[J].Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences,2017,49(5):548-563.
[26]DROR I E.Practical solutions to cognitive and human human factor challenges in forensic science[J].Forensic Science Policy&Management,2013,4:105–113.
[27]THOMPSON W C.Painting the target around the matching profile:The Texas sharpshooter fallacy in forensic DNA interpretation[J].Law,Probability and Risk,2009,8:257–276.
[28]THOMPSON W C.What role should investigative facts play in the evaluation of scientific evidence?[J].Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences,2011,43:123–134.
[29]Office of the Inspector General.A review of the FBI’s progress in responding to the recommendations in the office of the inspector general report on the fingerprint misidentification in the Brandon Mayfield case[R/OL].Washington(DC),2011.https://www.oig.justice.gov/special/s1105.pdf
[30]BUDOWLE B,Bottrell M C,Bunch S G,et al.A Perspective on Errors,Bias,and Interpretation in the Forensic Sciences and Direction for Continuing Advancement[J].Journal of Forensic Sciences,2009,54(4):798-808.
[31]CHAMPOD C.Research focused mainly on bias will paralyse forensic science[J].Science and Justice,2014,54:107–109.
[32]LOCKHART J J,SATYA-MURTI S.Diagnosing Crime and Diagnosing Disease:Bias Reduction Strategies in the Forensic and Clinical Science[J].Journal of Forensic Science,2017,Early View.doi:10.1111/1556-4029.13453
[33]GROSE I C.Fingerprint Identification:Potential Sources of Error and the Cause of Wrongful Convictions[J].Journal of Student Science and Technology,2017,10(1):99-110.
[34]SAKS M J,KOEHLER J J,The coming paradigm shift in forensic identification sciences[J].Science,2005,309:892–5.
[35]GARRETT B L,Convicting the innocent:Where criminal prosecutions go wrong[M].2011,Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press.
[36]HAMPIKIAN G,WEST E,AKSELROD O.The genetics of innocence:analysis of 194 U.S.DNA exonerations[J].Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics,2011,12:97-120.
[37]The National Registry of Exoneration[EB/OL].2017,http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/about.aspx
[38]LAPPORTE G,Wrongful Convictions and DNA Exonerations:Understanding the Role of Forensic Science[J/OL].NIJ Journal,2017,279(9).https://nij.gov/journals/279/Pages/wrongfulconvictions-and-dna-exonerations.aspx
[39]SMIT N M,MORGAN R M,LAGNADO D A.A systematic analysis of misleading evidence in unsafe rulings in England and Wales[J].Science&Justice,2017,in Press.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2017.09.005
[40]KLOOSTERMAN A,SJERPS M,QUAK A.Error rates in forensic DNA analysis:Definition,numbers,impact and communication[J].Forensic Science International:Genetics,2014,12:77–85.
[41]LINACRE A.Towards a research culture in the forensic sciences[J].Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences,2013,45(4):381-388.
[2]National Research Council.Strengthening forensic science in the united states:a path forward[M].Washington:National Academy Press,2009.
[3]Presidents’Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.Forensic science in criminal courts:ensuring scientific validity of feature-comparison methods[R].Washington:PCAST,2016.
[4]BEATRICE S.The relationship between forensic science and judicial error:a study covering error sources,bias,and remedies[D].Lausanne:University of Lausanne,2009.
[5]花锋.法庭科学实验室认可及其对策[J].刑事技术,2003(3):3-6.
[6]王桂强.物证鉴定方法确认和标准操作程序[J].刑事技术,2006(6):3-8.
[7]BALLANTYNE K N,EDMOND G,FOUND B.Peer review in forensic science[J].Forensic Science International,2017,277:66–76.
[8]Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc 509 U.S.579,593[EB/OL].1993.https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-102.ZO.html
[9]KASSINA S M,DROR I E,KUKUCKA J.The forensic confirmation bias:problems,perspectives,and proposed solutions[J].Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition,2013,2(1):42–52.
[10]LANGENBURG G.A performance study of the ACE-V process:a pilot study to measure the accuracy,precision,reproducibility,repeatability,and bias-ability of conclusions resulting from the ACE-V process[J].Journal of Forensic Identification,2009,59:219–257.
[11]CAMPBELL A.The fingerprint inquiry report[R/OL].APS Group Scotland,Edinburgh Scotland,2011.http://www.thefingerprintinquiryscotland.org.uk/inquiry/3127-2.html
[12]WONG C,AHARONI E,ALIYEV G R,et al.The potential of blind collaborative justice[R/OL].The RAND Corporation,2015,https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248829.pdf
[13]GISCHE M.Disagreements in technical work[R/OL].Arlington,Virginia:the International Symposium on Forensic Science Error Management.2017.https://www.nist.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2017/08/23/melissagischethursdayafternoonsession.pdf
[14]National Commission of Forensic Science.View of the Commission on Report and Case Record Contents[R/OL].2016.https://www.justice.gov/archives/ncfs/page/file/865051/download
[15]DROR I E.Human expert performance in forensic decision making:seven different sources of bias[J].Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences,2017,49:541–547.
[16]DROR I E,MORGAN R,RANDO C,et al.The bias snowball and the bias cascade effects:two distinct biases that may impact forensic decision making[J].Journal of Forensic Science,2017,62(3):832–833.
[17]EDMOND G,TANGEN J,SSEARSTON R,et al.Contextual bias and cross-contamination in the forensic sciences:the corrosive implications for investigations,plea bargains,trials and appeals[J].Law,Probability and Risk,2015,14:1–25.
[18]DROR I E.MCCORMACK B M,Epstein J.Cognitive bias and its impact on expert witnesses and the court[J].The Judges’Journal,2015,54(4):8-14.
[19]Forensic Science Regulator.Guidance:cognitive bias effects relevant to forensic science examinations[R/OL].2015.https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/510147/217_FSR-G-217_Cognitive_bias_appendix.pdf
[20]National Commission on Forensic Science.Ensuring that forensic analysis is based upon task relevant information[R/OL].Washington(DC),2015.https://www.justice.gov/ncfs/file/818196/download
[21]MATTIJSSEN T,KERKHOFF W,BERGER H,et al Implementing context information management in forensic casework:Minimizing contextual bias in firearms examination[J].Science and Justice,2016,56:113–122.
[22]JEANGUENAT A M,BUDOWLE B,DROR I E.Strengthening forensic DNA decision making through a better understanding of the influence of cognitive bias[J].Science and Justice,2017,in Press.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2017.07.005
[23]KRANE D E,FORD S,GILDER J R,et al.Sequential unmasking:a means of minimizing observer effects in forensic dna interpretation[J].Journal of Forensic Science,2008,53:1006-1007.
[24]DROR I E,THOMPSON W C,MEISSNER C A,et al.Letter to the editor-context management toolbox:a linear sequential unmasking(LSU)approach for minimizing cognitive bias in forensic decision making[J].Journal of Forensic Science,2015,60:1111–1112.
[25]LANGENBYRG G.Addressing potential observer effects in forensic science:a perspective from a forensic scientist who uses linear sequential unmasking techniques[J].Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences,2017,49(5):548-563.
[26]DROR I E.Practical solutions to cognitive and human human factor challenges in forensic science[J].Forensic Science Policy&Management,2013,4:105–113.
[27]THOMPSON W C.Painting the target around the matching profile:The Texas sharpshooter fallacy in forensic DNA interpretation[J].Law,Probability and Risk,2009,8:257–276.
[28]THOMPSON W C.What role should investigative facts play in the evaluation of scientific evidence?[J].Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences,2011,43:123–134.
[29]Office of the Inspector General.A review of the FBI’s progress in responding to the recommendations in the office of the inspector general report on the fingerprint misidentification in the Brandon Mayfield case[R/OL].Washington(DC),2011.https://www.oig.justice.gov/special/s1105.pdf
[30]BUDOWLE B,Bottrell M C,Bunch S G,et al.A Perspective on Errors,Bias,and Interpretation in the Forensic Sciences and Direction for Continuing Advancement[J].Journal of Forensic Sciences,2009,54(4):798-808.
[31]CHAMPOD C.Research focused mainly on bias will paralyse forensic science[J].Science and Justice,2014,54:107–109.
[32]LOCKHART J J,SATYA-MURTI S.Diagnosing Crime and Diagnosing Disease:Bias Reduction Strategies in the Forensic and Clinical Science[J].Journal of Forensic Science,2017,Early View.doi:10.1111/1556-4029.13453
[33]GROSE I C.Fingerprint Identification:Potential Sources of Error and the Cause of Wrongful Convictions[J].Journal of Student Science and Technology,2017,10(1):99-110.
[34]SAKS M J,KOEHLER J J,The coming paradigm shift in forensic identification sciences[J].Science,2005,309:892–5.
[35]GARRETT B L,Convicting the innocent:Where criminal prosecutions go wrong[M].2011,Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press.
[36]HAMPIKIAN G,WEST E,AKSELROD O.The genetics of innocence:analysis of 194 U.S.DNA exonerations[J].Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics,2011,12:97-120.
[37]The National Registry of Exoneration[EB/OL].2017,http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/about.aspx
[38]LAPPORTE G,Wrongful Convictions and DNA Exonerations:Understanding the Role of Forensic Science[J/OL].NIJ Journal,2017,279(9).https://nij.gov/journals/279/Pages/wrongfulconvictions-and-dna-exonerations.aspx
[39]SMIT N M,MORGAN R M,LAGNADO D A.A systematic analysis of misleading evidence in unsafe rulings in England and Wales[J].Science&Justice,2017,in Press.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2017.09.005
[40]KLOOSTERMAN A,SJERPS M,QUAK A.Error rates in forensic DNA analysis:Definition,numbers,impact and communication[J].Forensic Science International:Genetics,2014,12:77–85.
[41]LINACRE A.Towards a research culture in the forensic sciences[J].Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences,2013,45(4):381-388.