Failed Evidence: Why Law Enforcement Resists Science

by David A. Harris

With the popularity of crime dramas like CSI focusing on forensic science, and increasing numbers of police and prosecutors making wide-spread use of DNA, high-tech science seems to have become the handmaiden of law enforcement. But this is a myth, asserts law professor and nationally known expert on police profiling David A. Harris. In fact, most of law enforcement does not embrace science—it rejects it instead, resisting it vigorously. The question at the heart of this book is why.

Eyewitness identifications procedures using simultaneous lineups—showing the witness six persons together, as police have traditionally done—produces a significant number of incorrect identifications.

Interrogations that include threats of harsh penalties and untruths about the existence of evidence proving the suspect's guilt significantly increase the prospect of an innocent person confessing falsely.

Fingerprint matching does not use probability calculations based on collected and standardized data to generate conclusions, but rather human interpretation and judgment. Examiners generally claim a zero rate of error—an untenable claim in the face of publicly known errors by the best examiners in the U.S.

Failed Evidence explores the real reasons that police and prosecutors resist scientific change, and it lays out a concrete plan to bring law enforcement into the scientific present. Written in a crisp and engaging style, free of legal and scientific jargon, Failed Evidence will explain to police and prosecutors, political leaders and policy makers, as well as other experts and anyone else who cares about how law enforcement does its job, where we should go from here. Because only if we understand why law enforcement resists science will we be able to break through this resistance and convince police and prosecutors to rely on the best that science has to offer. Justice demands no less.

Genres: Science, Law, Nonfiction

269 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2012

Reviews

[Unwisely · Rating 1 out of 5]

Look, this topic looks interesting and important. But, man, I couldn't get through it. I think I got about a chapter and a half in before giving up in despair. The writing is just not interesting enough to keep the casual reader interested. Too bad, I'm sure it makes good points...but I'll never know. Boo.

[Gianni · Rating 3 out of 5]

A pretty good overview, but quite repetitive.

[TheBookGroupie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Failed Evidence is the perfect book for discussion groups because it includes behavioral science, hard science, sad stories, heroic stories and other qualities that will appeal to lots of different friends' jobs and experiences. It is written in a good conversational style--- not academic at all and it raises a lot of good questions in your mind. Of course, it reminds me of CSI on TV, but I really like that it shows the real pressures on police and prosecutors rather than just accusing them for wrongful convictions. I never knew why anyone would confess to a crime he or she didn't commit until I read this book. I also didn't know that fingerprinting isn't all that scientifically solid or that defendants could also use the content of police interrogations when presenting their side of the case. This is really such a fascinating book... I just keep wanting to talk about it.

[Sue · Rating 2 out of 5]

Hoity-toity, small print and biased view. No pictures--couldn't you afford an illustration? or two? Written like a mix of college "paper" peppered with a very biased negative opinion.