How Faulty Bite Mark and Hair Analysis Can Lead to Wrongful Convictions

 Posted on January 31,2024 in Criminal Defense

The criminal justice system often relies on forensic evidence to establish guilt or innocence in a criminal case. Forensic methods that are commonly used in criminal cases include bite mark analysis and hair analysis. However, researchers and criminal justice advocates have raised serious concerns about the reliability and accuracy of these techniques, highlighting how they can lead to wrongful convictions. For those who are facing criminal charges, an experienced attorney can review and challenge the evidence while building an effective defense strategy to help a person avoid being convicted.

Faulty Bite Mark Analysis

Bite mark analysis involves examining marks left on a victim's body. Analysts may attempt to match those marks with a suspect's dental records. Despite being considered a valid forensic method for decades, recent studies have shown that bite mark analysis lacks scientific validity.

According to several leading experts, including the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, bite mark analysis cannot reliably identify the source of a bite mark with reasonable accuracy. In fact, researchers have found that even experienced examiners cannot consistently agree on whether bite marks were actually caused by human teeth.

In some cases, innocent people have been wrongfully convicted based on faulty bite mark analysis. They may have had similar dental patterns as the actual perpetrator, or they may have been mistakenly identified due to examiner bias or inconsistencies in interpretation. Some defendants who were convicted based on bite mark evidence have been exonerated after spending years in prison due to DNA evidence proving their innocence. Unfortunately, while bite mark analysis has been discredited, no court has determined that this type of evidence is inadmissible.

Problems With Hair Analysis

Hair analysis has long been used as evidence in criminal cases. Law enforcement agencies often rely on experts who perform microscopic examinations of hair strands found at crime scenes, comparing them with hair samples taken from suspects. Supposedly, these experts can identify the part of the body from which hair originated, determine whether it was cut, pulled, or fell out, and examine other characteristics to positively identify suspects.

The FBI has used hair analysis during criminal investigations for decades. However, in 2015, the FBI admitted that after reviewing a large number of cases, it found that substantial errors had been committed. Errors were discovered in 90 percent of 268 cases that resulted in convictions. The errors included inaccurate statements made during trials that overstated the significance of hair comparisons as conclusive evidence linking defendants to crimes. These cases included 33 people who had been sentenced to death, with nine of these cases resulting in executions and five people dying while in prison.

Experts have noted that hair is not the same as fingerprints. There is no way to know how many people have similar hair or how often people may be misidentified based on hair analysis. While “experts” may be able to distinguish between hair samples taken from two different people, they have noted that hair analysis is not a method that may be used to positively identify a suspect

The Consequences of Faulty Forensic Analysis

Wrongful convictions resulting from faulty bite mark and hair analysis can have devastating consequences for innocent people who are convicted of crimes they did not commit. While there are clear flaws in these types of evidence, jurors in criminal trials may not be aware of these issues, and confident testimony given by “experts” can often be convincing. Because courts continue to allow this type of faulty evidence and testimony to be used during trials, wrongful convictions can still occur. Besides the personal toll on people who have been wrongfully convicted, these miscarriages of justice erode public trust in the criminal justice system. This highlights the urgent need for reform and increased scrutiny over the forensic methods used in criminal investigations and prosecutions.

Contact Our Connecticut Criminal Defense Lawyer

At Woolf Law Firm, LLC, our Hartford criminal defense attorney works to ensure that our clients’ rights are protected when they defend against criminal charges. We understand how to challenge faulty evidence and ensure that investigators and prosecutors do not rely on flawed methods when pursuing criminal charges and convictions. Call 860-290-8690 today for a free consultation