What do you think?
Rate this book
Junk Science and the American Criminal Justice System
An insider's journey into the heart of a broken, racist system of justice and the role junk science plays in maintaining the status quo.
From CSI to Forensic Files to the celebrated reputation of the FBI crime lab, "forensic scientists" have long been mythologized in American popular culture as infallible crime solvers. Judges and juries put their faith in "expert witnesses" and innocent people have been executed as a result. Innocent people are on death row today, condemned by junk science.
In 2012, the Innocence Project began searching for prisoners convicted by junk science, and three men, each convicted of capital murder, became M. Chris Fabricant's clients. Junk Science and the American Criminal Justice System chronicles the fights to overturn their wrongful convictions and to end the use of the "science" that destroyed their lives. Weaving together courtroom battles from Mississippi to Texas to New York City, Fabricant takes the reader on a journey into the heart of a broken, racist system of justice and the role forensic science plays in maintaining the status quo.
At turns gripping, enraging, and moving, Junk Science is a meticulously researched insider's perspective of the American criminal justice system. Previously untold stories of wrongful executions, corrupt prosecutors, and quackery masquerading as science animate Fabricant's astonishing true-crime narrative. The book also features a full-color photo insert that illustrates the junk science explored by the author.
From CSI to Forensic Files to the celebrated reputation of the FBI crime lab, "forensic scientists" have long been mythologized in American popular culture as infallible crime solvers. Judges and juries put their faith in "expert witnesses" and innocent people have been executed as a result. Innocent people are on death row today, condemned by junk science.
In 2012, the Innocence Project began searching for prisoners convicted by junk science, and three men, each convicted of capital murder, became M. Chris Fabricant's clients. Junk Science and the American Criminal Justice System chronicles the fights to overturn their wrongful convictions and to end the use of the "science" that destroyed their lives. Weaving together courtroom battles from Mississippi to Texas to New York City, Fabricant takes the reader on a journey into the heart of a broken, racist system of justice and the role forensic science plays in maintaining the status quo.
At turns gripping, enraging, and moving, Junk Science is a meticulously researched insider's perspective of the American criminal justice system. Previously untold stories of wrongful executions, corrupt prosecutors, and quackery masquerading as science animate Fabricant's astonishing true-crime narrative. The book also features a full-color photo insert that illustrates the junk science explored by the author.
368 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 5, 2022
137 people are currently reading
2524 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 178 reviews
April 15, 2022
Junk Science and the American Criminal Justice System isn't the book I was expecting, but I did learn a bit from the book I got. I blame poor marketing on my expectations not being met. Can we rewrite the blurbs?
Junk Science and the American Criminal Justice System is not a deep dive into how poor science and confirmation bias are used to wrongly convict, nor does it offer a plan to rise above. Instead it's a disjointed review of example cases where this “junk science” has been used by experts, their testimonies resulting in wrongful convictions and even executions. The author works for The Innocence Project, so I get that he has an axe to grind, but I was hoping for more answers and fewer "this crappy thing happened because bias" summaries.
M. Chris Fabricant can turn a phrase, though, as evidenced in an observation of a test regarding confirmation bias: "The fingerprints had not changed, only their minds."
I worked in genetics research for 13 years, so obviously I'm a strong advocate for forensic DNA evidence being treated as the only reliable and indisputable tool we currently have in our toolbox, both to convict and to overturn prior (erroneous) convictions. The author, M. Chris Fabricant, agrees with me on this point, but I'm not sure what we're supposed to do with this information.
Overall it's not a bad book, and it definitely raises awareness of issues with the use of expert testimony. Could Junk Science and the American Criminal Justice System use an editor? Sure, but if you love forensics in general, you probably also love puzzles and this poorly organized book is a doozy.
Junk Science and the American Criminal Justice System is not a deep dive into how poor science and confirmation bias are used to wrongly convict, nor does it offer a plan to rise above. Instead it's a disjointed review of example cases where this “junk science” has been used by experts, their testimonies resulting in wrongful convictions and even executions. The author works for The Innocence Project, so I get that he has an axe to grind, but I was hoping for more answers and fewer "this crappy thing happened because bias" summaries.
M. Chris Fabricant can turn a phrase, though, as evidenced in an observation of a test regarding confirmation bias: "The fingerprints had not changed, only their minds."
I worked in genetics research for 13 years, so obviously I'm a strong advocate for forensic DNA evidence being treated as the only reliable and indisputable tool we currently have in our toolbox, both to convict and to overturn prior (erroneous) convictions. The author, M. Chris Fabricant, agrees with me on this point, but I'm not sure what we're supposed to do with this information.
Overall it's not a bad book, and it definitely raises awareness of issues with the use of expert testimony. Could Junk Science and the American Criminal Justice System use an editor? Sure, but if you love forensics in general, you probably also love puzzles and this poorly organized book is a doozy.
April 2, 2022
As a consumer of true crime media, I was excited to see this book available. I knew a little about the turning of ‘crime science’ and how its been disproven to be effective in a lot of cases. I was looking forward to this book in a way that told me ‘why’. Why doesn’t this science work? However, this book focuses much less on the why and more on the effects of what the ‘science’ has wrought mostly, false imprisonment cases.
The author works for the Innocence Project, so they already have a firm belief in the ‘junk’ of the science. I however, as an outsider of the system would have really loved a more in depth look at the why its junk first. As someone who was raised on CSI it was just a jarring realization that basically all of it was bunk. Of course, that’s just not the thesis of this book so you’ll just have to adjust your expectations.
I thought it was super interesting to hear the effects and stories that surround this system. How a faulty system was elevated again and again as factual to help prove cases. I did think this book could use some cut and paste editing. The stories didn’t flow very well, with us focusing on a few cases that would be picked up and dropped at random intervals. I had a hard time remembering the details between the cases.
The author talks a little about how many of these cases seem to be there to prove someone they already suspect and often suspected due to their race. It’s also a great argument against the death penalty when crimes are being disproven later.
Overall though, I thought this was an interesting non-fiction novel about something I knew very little about. Unlike a lot of non-fiction, I didn’t find my mind drifting or wishing there was a little less info. In fact, I often wanted more. There was a story of a dentist in a courtroom that was absolutely wild and worth the entire listen to this book.
Thank you to Netgalley and RB Media for a copy of this audiobook in exchange for an honest review. The narration to this was absolutely great.
Apologies for any mistakes or whatever, I have the flu.
The author works for the Innocence Project, so they already have a firm belief in the ‘junk’ of the science. I however, as an outsider of the system would have really loved a more in depth look at the why its junk first. As someone who was raised on CSI it was just a jarring realization that basically all of it was bunk. Of course, that’s just not the thesis of this book so you’ll just have to adjust your expectations.
I thought it was super interesting to hear the effects and stories that surround this system. How a faulty system was elevated again and again as factual to help prove cases. I did think this book could use some cut and paste editing. The stories didn’t flow very well, with us focusing on a few cases that would be picked up and dropped at random intervals. I had a hard time remembering the details between the cases.
The author talks a little about how many of these cases seem to be there to prove someone they already suspect and often suspected due to their race. It’s also a great argument against the death penalty when crimes are being disproven later.
Overall though, I thought this was an interesting non-fiction novel about something I knew very little about. Unlike a lot of non-fiction, I didn’t find my mind drifting or wishing there was a little less info. In fact, I often wanted more. There was a story of a dentist in a courtroom that was absolutely wild and worth the entire listen to this book.
Thank you to Netgalley and RB Media for a copy of this audiobook in exchange for an honest review. The narration to this was absolutely great.
Apologies for any mistakes or whatever, I have the flu.
February 11, 2024
Bite mark comparisons, hair microscopy, burn pattern analysis, comparative bullet-lead analysis—these are only some of the “junk science” techniques that have been used in recent decades to wrongfully convict countless Americans. This book is educational, enlightening, and enraging. It should be required reading for all prosecutors, judges, and defense attorneys. A large part of the book consists of stories of individuals who were wrongfully convicted based on junk science and then eventually, after many years and great difficultly, exonerated (sometimes posthumously).
“Judges and jurors kept accepting ‘training and experience’ as a proxy for valid science, leading directly to centuries of imprisonment endured by innocent men and women, mothers and fathers.”
The author also describes the origins and growth of pseudoscientific forensic organizations (e.g., the American Society of Forensic Odontology) that focus on eminence-based rather than evidence-based practices and that only really vetted members in terms of whether they paid their dues. We learn about the annual conferences these organizations hold. That they take unbelievable steps to silent dissent and ostracize dissenters. We are introduced to countless charlatans whose “expert” testimony and exaggerated claims of certainty in their judgments (e.g., in bite-mark matches) put away numerous innocent people. Some of the charlatans are “distinguished fellows” in their fields of junk science. Some of them also appear to be sociopaths (e.g., Michael West). Not least, we meet many badly behaving special agents, police officers, prosecutors (e.g., Nancy Grace; Henry Wade), and politicians (e.g., Rick Perry). One investigation of misbehaving FBI special agents revealed that they had given false testimony in at least 90% of cases reviewed. (They were not fired.) Henry Wade even bragged about his shameless prosecutorial philosophy:
“Any prosecutor could convict a guilty man, it takes a real pro to convict and innocent man.”
One thing that is especially enraging is the reaction of prosecutors and judges to exculpatory evidence—whether it is evidence of the invalidity of the forensic techniques used to convict someone, or evidence of a failed DNA match between the convicted person and the actual offender. As the author notes, court actors are so resistant to exculpatory DNA evidence, that Innocent Project attorneys have developed the phrase “unindicted co-ejaculator theories” to refer to the new theories developed by prosecutors and judges to dismiss failed DNA matches. It is also unbelievable how long the process can take to acquit someone wrongfully convicted. For example, a single proceeding can take years to complete.
“We adjourned. Another year went by.”
The book also talks readers through the Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993) U.S. Supreme Court case, which enacted standards for expert testimony (e.g., that the introduced “science” included hypothesis testing and passed peer review)—standards that state courts often subsequently disregarded. And the book explains the ground-breaking, earth-shattering importance of the 2009 report by the National Academy of Sciences on the problems (or invalidity) of forensic science techniques—a report that immediately led “expert” witnesses, prosecutors, and judges to turn on the NAS scientists. That is, the reaction to NAS saying that forensic techniques might be junk science was to say that these “statisticians, law professors, and other academics” don’t know what they are talking about, because they lack real-world experience.
“What the hell did people who were statisticians and other non-doctors think they were doing messing around in territory which they shouldn’t be messing around in?”
“Judges and jurors kept accepting ‘training and experience’ as a proxy for valid science, leading directly to centuries of imprisonment endured by innocent men and women, mothers and fathers.”
The author also describes the origins and growth of pseudoscientific forensic organizations (e.g., the American Society of Forensic Odontology) that focus on eminence-based rather than evidence-based practices and that only really vetted members in terms of whether they paid their dues. We learn about the annual conferences these organizations hold. That they take unbelievable steps to silent dissent and ostracize dissenters. We are introduced to countless charlatans whose “expert” testimony and exaggerated claims of certainty in their judgments (e.g., in bite-mark matches) put away numerous innocent people. Some of the charlatans are “distinguished fellows” in their fields of junk science. Some of them also appear to be sociopaths (e.g., Michael West). Not least, we meet many badly behaving special agents, police officers, prosecutors (e.g., Nancy Grace; Henry Wade), and politicians (e.g., Rick Perry). One investigation of misbehaving FBI special agents revealed that they had given false testimony in at least 90% of cases reviewed. (They were not fired.) Henry Wade even bragged about his shameless prosecutorial philosophy:
“Any prosecutor could convict a guilty man, it takes a real pro to convict and innocent man.”
One thing that is especially enraging is the reaction of prosecutors and judges to exculpatory evidence—whether it is evidence of the invalidity of the forensic techniques used to convict someone, or evidence of a failed DNA match between the convicted person and the actual offender. As the author notes, court actors are so resistant to exculpatory DNA evidence, that Innocent Project attorneys have developed the phrase “unindicted co-ejaculator theories” to refer to the new theories developed by prosecutors and judges to dismiss failed DNA matches. It is also unbelievable how long the process can take to acquit someone wrongfully convicted. For example, a single proceeding can take years to complete.
“We adjourned. Another year went by.”
The book also talks readers through the Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993) U.S. Supreme Court case, which enacted standards for expert testimony (e.g., that the introduced “science” included hypothesis testing and passed peer review)—standards that state courts often subsequently disregarded. And the book explains the ground-breaking, earth-shattering importance of the 2009 report by the National Academy of Sciences on the problems (or invalidity) of forensic science techniques—a report that immediately led “expert” witnesses, prosecutors, and judges to turn on the NAS scientists. That is, the reaction to NAS saying that forensic techniques might be junk science was to say that these “statisticians, law professors, and other academics” don’t know what they are talking about, because they lack real-world experience.
“What the hell did people who were statisticians and other non-doctors think they were doing messing around in territory which they shouldn’t be messing around in?”
July 27, 2022
This is one of the most devastating books I’ve ever read. I’ve been familiar with the innocence project for almost a decade but to read these cases and the horrific science and egos they hinged on made me physically ill. This will stick with me for a long time
June 23, 2025
***SECOND UPDATE 06/25/2025 - from an article John Grisham has in today’s New Orleans Times Picayune because this innocent man is still on death row. Louisiana won’t quit. The state that required every public school teacher in the state to post the Ten Commandments in their classroom because following Jesus is the way, has once again proven their hypocrisy. What I didn’t know before, outside of the DNA evidence not being there the prosecutors have video of the dentist taking a mold of Duncan’s teeth and pressing them on this poor child’s body’s, to create the bite marks they used to convict him - indefensible. The system is rotten and it’s a travesty these prosecutors, medical examiners and fake experts haven’t been put behind bars. I’m changing my rating to 5 stars. People should be screaming from the rooftops about this shameful excuse for justice.
“That Duncan is still on death row as I write (because the state’s appeals aren’t yet exhausted) is a further travesty of justice and even more so given that the state of Louisiana seems intent on keeping him there — despite the weight of evidence supporting his innocence.”
Duncan’s case is perhaps the most glaring example of how these “expert” opinions can condemn innocent men. West is on video forcibly pushing a mold of Duncan’s teeth into Haley’s body — actually creating the “bite marks” later “matched” to Duncan’s teeth and wielded by the state against him. What’s more, the state hid the astonishing video from the jury and its testifying expert, who, without ever seeing how the marks were actually made, unsurprisingly found “bite marks that matched Duncan’s dentition.”
UPDATE 04/25/2025 - Another Junk Science based death penalty conviction overturned. In pro death penalty Louisiana - of all places - Duncan’s conviction has been nullified based in part on the bite mark junk science described in this book. Over the last 27 years 9 cases have been overturned due to the false evidence submitted by two dentists. Read this book to see how they came up with this scheme. Truly baffling how society has accepted this and made convictions based off of nothing.
https://veritenews.org/2025/04/25/jim...
**************££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££
This book was disjointed and difficult to follow but the stories were riveting.
First things first, this book is important. That people are wrongly convicted in America based on flimsy evidence, bad policing and shady prosecutors isn’t a surprise. We’ve read the stories and listened to the podcasts. Junk science in particular has been used to convict people who aren’t guilty. Bite mark evidence is the main focus here.
What’s frustrating is how we so easily accept these things as evidence. We trust the experts. We may not know how the sausage gets made but we trust that it’s based in science. This books covers that often it’s actually not based in science. Like at all. But good luck getting any conviction overturned, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.
You’ll be dumbfounded how a group of dentists decided they wanted prestige and an end to the boredom it surely is to be a dentist so they came up with their own organization where they made themselves diplomates of this, that and the other and made sexy and lucrative second careers as forensic dentists. My run on sentence isn’t just me being clever it’s to illustrate a point.
This was hard to read at times. It could have used a different editor. It zigs and zags. If you want to know what it’s like to live inside my head, read this book. I thought it was me at first. It was not. He’s all over the place with his stories and in one instance, even his facts.
FOR EXAMPLE:!!!
You know how it is, especially when reading non fiction, you’re frequently stopping to google what you just read & get more info. See what these monsters look like. Etc etc. Thats what I did when early in the book he covered the murder of Debbie Sue Carter and the two men wrongly convicted of her rape and murder. They eventually found the actual perp through DNA - the only foolproof way to convict SEE UPDATE ON THIS COMMENT BELOW - and he doesn’t even get the guys name right in the book. !!! In a book about the inaccuracy of junk science. So, do I trust most of what he said here? I’m inclined to because of my degree in listening to true crime pods. But FFS when the focus of your book is telling how cops and prosecutors are getting it wrong, you should try hard to GET IT RIGHT. Especially when a simple internet search will help. Google is your friend.
“after DNA evidence proved that their star witness at trial, Glen Moore, was more than a witness: He was the man who had actually raped and murdered twenty-one-year-old Debbie Sue Carter, a high school classmate who’d rejected Moore’s advances one night at the Coachlight Bar in Ada, Oklahoma”
The real murderer’s name was GLEN GORE. But to hell with accuracy. I’ll get over it. AFTER RETHINKING THIS A COUPLE YEARS LATER IT IS POSSIBLE THE WORD/TEXT EDITOR CHANGED THE LAST NAME and no one fact checked it.
My take away is that junk science - along with police and prosecutors who are only interested in solve rates and not the truth - is ruining lives and allowing the real murderers and rapists to roam free. Due to expedience and laziness and zero science.
I’ve updated my rating on the book because I still think about what I read here all the time. Also I feel bad for slamming how hard it was to follow. I may have been a bit too harsh. It wasn’t so bad that it didn’t stick with me. I come back to this book every time I see one of these cases in the news.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
APPARENTLY EVEN DNA ISN’T FOOLPROOF EITHER
Because humans are not infallible. Check out this “brief” 158 page report from the city of Austin on their DNA lab. There are so many ways a conviction can go wrong. I’m calling it a huge win that Austin has recognized their errors and are doing something about it to prevent it from happening in the future. Not sure what happens to six years of convictions under this unit.
https://www.austintexas.gov/edims/pio...
Another update to look toward is a recent exoneration of a man convicted of murder 40 years ago in Odessa. Which happened because the police chief’s son, daughter and daughter in law all listened to a podcast and then called the chief up to say ‘this doesn’t sound right.’ Props to Gen Z. The kids are all right. An interesting aside to this one is even one of the prosecutors made an effort to have the case reexamined 10 years after the conviction and it was refused. When even the prosecutor who put someone in prison is unable to get a conviction reexamined you see what a Sisyphean task it is for these exonerations to happen at all. I can’t imagine the frustration and pain for the victim’s family and the innocent.
https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-pol...
“That Duncan is still on death row as I write (because the state’s appeals aren’t yet exhausted) is a further travesty of justice and even more so given that the state of Louisiana seems intent on keeping him there — despite the weight of evidence supporting his innocence.”
Duncan’s case is perhaps the most glaring example of how these “expert” opinions can condemn innocent men. West is on video forcibly pushing a mold of Duncan’s teeth into Haley’s body — actually creating the “bite marks” later “matched” to Duncan’s teeth and wielded by the state against him. What’s more, the state hid the astonishing video from the jury and its testifying expert, who, without ever seeing how the marks were actually made, unsurprisingly found “bite marks that matched Duncan’s dentition.”
UPDATE 04/25/2025 - Another Junk Science based death penalty conviction overturned. In pro death penalty Louisiana - of all places - Duncan’s conviction has been nullified based in part on the bite mark junk science described in this book. Over the last 27 years 9 cases have been overturned due to the false evidence submitted by two dentists. Read this book to see how they came up with this scheme. Truly baffling how society has accepted this and made convictions based off of nothing.
https://veritenews.org/2025/04/25/jim...
**************££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££
This book was disjointed and difficult to follow but the stories were riveting.
First things first, this book is important. That people are wrongly convicted in America based on flimsy evidence, bad policing and shady prosecutors isn’t a surprise. We’ve read the stories and listened to the podcasts. Junk science in particular has been used to convict people who aren’t guilty. Bite mark evidence is the main focus here.
What’s frustrating is how we so easily accept these things as evidence. We trust the experts. We may not know how the sausage gets made but we trust that it’s based in science. This books covers that often it’s actually not based in science. Like at all. But good luck getting any conviction overturned, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.
You’ll be dumbfounded how a group of dentists decided they wanted prestige and an end to the boredom it surely is to be a dentist so they came up with their own organization where they made themselves diplomates of this, that and the other and made sexy and lucrative second careers as forensic dentists. My run on sentence isn’t just me being clever it’s to illustrate a point.
This was hard to read at times. It could have used a different editor. It zigs and zags. If you want to know what it’s like to live inside my head, read this book. I thought it was me at first. It was not. He’s all over the place with his stories and in one instance, even his facts.
FOR EXAMPLE:!!!
You know how it is, especially when reading non fiction, you’re frequently stopping to google what you just read & get more info. See what these monsters look like. Etc etc. Thats what I did when early in the book he covered the murder of Debbie Sue Carter and the two men wrongly convicted of her rape and murder. They eventually found the actual perp through DNA - the only foolproof way to convict SEE UPDATE ON THIS COMMENT BELOW - and he doesn’t even get the guys name right in the book. !!! In a book about the inaccuracy of junk science. So, do I trust most of what he said here? I’m inclined to because of my degree in listening to true crime pods. But FFS when the focus of your book is telling how cops and prosecutors are getting it wrong, you should try hard to GET IT RIGHT. Especially when a simple internet search will help. Google is your friend.
“after DNA evidence proved that their star witness at trial, Glen Moore, was more than a witness: He was the man who had actually raped and murdered twenty-one-year-old Debbie Sue Carter, a high school classmate who’d rejected Moore’s advances one night at the Coachlight Bar in Ada, Oklahoma”
The real murderer’s name was GLEN GORE. But to hell with accuracy. I’ll get over it. AFTER RETHINKING THIS A COUPLE YEARS LATER IT IS POSSIBLE THE WORD/TEXT EDITOR CHANGED THE LAST NAME and no one fact checked it.
My take away is that junk science - along with police and prosecutors who are only interested in solve rates and not the truth - is ruining lives and allowing the real murderers and rapists to roam free. Due to expedience and laziness and zero science.
I’ve updated my rating on the book because I still think about what I read here all the time. Also I feel bad for slamming how hard it was to follow. I may have been a bit too harsh. It wasn’t so bad that it didn’t stick with me. I come back to this book every time I see one of these cases in the news.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
APPARENTLY EVEN DNA ISN’T FOOLPROOF EITHER
Because humans are not infallible. Check out this “brief” 158 page report from the city of Austin on their DNA lab. There are so many ways a conviction can go wrong. I’m calling it a huge win that Austin has recognized their errors and are doing something about it to prevent it from happening in the future. Not sure what happens to six years of convictions under this unit.
https://www.austintexas.gov/edims/pio...
Another update to look toward is a recent exoneration of a man convicted of murder 40 years ago in Odessa. Which happened because the police chief’s son, daughter and daughter in law all listened to a podcast and then called the chief up to say ‘this doesn’t sound right.’ Props to Gen Z. The kids are all right. An interesting aside to this one is even one of the prosecutors made an effort to have the case reexamined 10 years after the conviction and it was refused. When even the prosecutor who put someone in prison is unable to get a conviction reexamined you see what a Sisyphean task it is for these exonerations to happen at all. I can’t imagine the frustration and pain for the victim’s family and the innocent.
https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-pol...
May 10, 2024
It's a lovely book about how pretty much everything you've seen on CSI that's not DNA evidence is bogus. Which means I guess that show's as much of a lie as Law & Order turned out to be, to my ongoing distress.
I guess you should read it because it's groundbreaking in exposing a lot of those myths that we take for granted, but MAN this needed a better editor. His afterword mentions that he started scribbling it down on a notepad after visiting one of his clients, and then on-off continuing it over the years and frankly...it shows. The tense is all over the place, he has at least three different narratives that he's bouncing around between and frankly I could barely keep any of the convicted innocent people straight. None of them have any character except for being names on a page -- towards the end, you find out one of them is pretty devotedly religious and always starts his conversations with "God bless you Mr Fabricant". And at that point I kind of started remembering him! More of those little humanizing touches earlier would have definitely helped to differentiate the cases.
It should be a simple ask : forensic science should be based on, well, science. And instead it's been based on experience, handed down from one practitioner to another like a medieval guild. And as the author points out...experience counts for nothing if it's experience in a flawed methodology. I have a decent amount of experience reading tarot cards, but it regrettably does not mean that tarot will ever be very good at telling the future. Apparently there was a similar problem in medicine until there was a big shift to "evidence-based" medicine. But that transition was successful because the clients were people who were dying, and insurance companies who were paying out more than they should have. With forensic science the clients are largely the prosecutors who are putting people away, and they are largely satisfied with the product they are getting. Much like cops, the emphasis is on winning/closing cases, not so much whether the theory they've developed is actually true or not. I don't know how you shift that paradigm, and the author doesn't provide much in the way of recommendations, unfortunately.
Until then, feels like the least we could do is moratorium the death penalty lest more potentially innocent people be murdered by the state. One is too many...and there have been a lot more than one.
I guess you should read it because it's groundbreaking in exposing a lot of those myths that we take for granted, but MAN this needed a better editor. His afterword mentions that he started scribbling it down on a notepad after visiting one of his clients, and then on-off continuing it over the years and frankly...it shows. The tense is all over the place, he has at least three different narratives that he's bouncing around between and frankly I could barely keep any of the convicted innocent people straight. None of them have any character except for being names on a page -- towards the end, you find out one of them is pretty devotedly religious and always starts his conversations with "God bless you Mr Fabricant". And at that point I kind of started remembering him! More of those little humanizing touches earlier would have definitely helped to differentiate the cases.
It should be a simple ask : forensic science should be based on, well, science. And instead it's been based on experience, handed down from one practitioner to another like a medieval guild. And as the author points out...experience counts for nothing if it's experience in a flawed methodology. I have a decent amount of experience reading tarot cards, but it regrettably does not mean that tarot will ever be very good at telling the future. Apparently there was a similar problem in medicine until there was a big shift to "evidence-based" medicine. But that transition was successful because the clients were people who were dying, and insurance companies who were paying out more than they should have. With forensic science the clients are largely the prosecutors who are putting people away, and they are largely satisfied with the product they are getting. Much like cops, the emphasis is on winning/closing cases, not so much whether the theory they've developed is actually true or not. I don't know how you shift that paradigm, and the author doesn't provide much in the way of recommendations, unfortunately.
Until then, feels like the least we could do is moratorium the death penalty lest more potentially innocent people be murdered by the state. One is too many...and there have been a lot more than one.
December 9, 2022
Nightmare fuel. Guaranteed to cause insomnia in anyone with a conscience.
The main focus of this book is how corrupt "science" was behind wrongful convictions obtained through bitemark "evidence."
Other tidbits that rose to the surface were prosecutors who double down on ridiculous theories despite overwhelming evidence, states that don't free the innocent, and the absence of honest professionals objecting to the so-called experts. I would like to read more about other cases (like the man at the end convicted based on tool mark evidence from a crap pair of mass produced pliers) and I'd like a deeper dive into the type of (abnormal) psychology that makes a group of boring rich dentists form a club to go around getting paid to testify about bs at trials.
The main focus of this book is how corrupt "science" was behind wrongful convictions obtained through bitemark "evidence."
Other tidbits that rose to the surface were prosecutors who double down on ridiculous theories despite overwhelming evidence, states that don't free the innocent, and the absence of honest professionals objecting to the so-called experts. I would like to read more about other cases (like the man at the end convicted based on tool mark evidence from a crap pair of mass produced pliers) and I'd like a deeper dive into the type of (abnormal) psychology that makes a group of boring rich dentists form a club to go around getting paid to testify about bs at trials.
September 2, 2022
Holy crap, I didn’t realize so many things we have been led to believe are science in criminal forensics are actually junk that either cannot be tested or have been proven to be incorrect. Bite marks, finger prints, blood spatter, fire patterns, shoe prints, basically everything but DNA just doesn’t have any basis in fact, and this book chronicles the Innocence Projects attempts to get junk science thrown out of court and get people out of prison and off death row. If you care at all about true crime, or even fictional crime shows on TV, read this book and learn about how messed up the whole system is. Dang.
May 26, 2022
I learned a lot from this book. It's amazing how the things we take for granted (without paying much attention to) like fingerprints, hair analysis, footprints, etc., actually turn out to be junk science, used to incarcerate the innocent. I guess I'm just naive, though I really should not be surprised by any failures of the "justice" system at this point. Only three stars because I found his writing confusing to follow (maybe it was the font?? Something just felt off). But definitely worth reading for the information.
December 29, 2022
Not the book I was expecting. As other reviewers have mentioned, I was anticipating a tour through the various "junk science" forensics admissible in court and popularized by crime media. Although there is some of that, the book is much more focused on several wrongfully convicted (and occasionally killed) individuals, and how pseudoscience played a tragic role in their conviction. In many ways, Junk Science feels like a sequel to Balko and Carrington's The Cadaver King and the Country Dentist. There's a lot dedicated to bike mark analysis and comparison, and the legal and social changes related to forensic odontology since multiple high profile conventions based on bite mark evidence have been overturned. The structure of the book can occasionally feel disjointed, but the subject matter is incredibly important, and the criminal trail sections of the book are *very* good.
September 30, 2022
An importance history lesson in why you should always be skeptical when the government says it's following the science
January 16, 2025
An excellent Christmas gift. A must read imo for any law student who wants to go into criminal law, especially for those who may be future prosecutors who care about truth and justice over “win” metrics. It also raises the question — in an era where law schools (or perhaps just mine) emphasize interdisciplinary studies, why is that confined to the humanities and the social sciences? This book highlights the devastating human consequences when those in the legal system are divorced from the scientific method. We should emphasize science in law school over the rhetorical “battle of the experts” that too often devolves into sophistry. And universally, this book is a testament to why we should not blindly accept the authority of so called “experts” without scrutiny of methodology whether in law, healthcare, economics, political science (see, e.g., Alan Lichtman).
August 5, 2024
This book is a must read. The only reason for 4 instead of. 5 stars is due to the slightly jumbled nature of the book. It can be difficult to keep all of the individual stories separate in your mind the way the book is set up. HOWEVER, I also appreciate that we get the “ending” of some key characters at the same time. I think a solution to this jumbled aspect would be to humanize these individuals more. What did they like to do before they were incarcerated, what were they like, what dreams did they have? This would help to make the stories stick but also give more humanity to people that have had their humanity stripped from them for decades.
September 14, 2022
My fellow critics of the American “Justice” System will find this book fascinating. Learn about the evidence that has been used in the past to decide the fate of many unfortunate Americans.
April 11, 2025
I love this kind of book. Part gripping narrative, part law/litigation history, part fascinating court room transcripts. Fabricant weaves all these elements together to tell the powerful and deeply saddening truth of junk science emerging alongside mass incarceration. And surprise surprise… both are still well and alive today. An important read for anyone who participates in the US justice system in any way (hint, we all do).
October 18, 2022
I was interested in the premise of true crime and junk science. This is a very heart-rending look at the lives of people who were wronged by Junk Science.
The author has two important storylines to convey. One is the rise of Junk Science and the acceptance of it in the court of law. The other contains the stories of individuals who might have or were helped when the truth came to light about the evidence used to convict them in the first place.
It was fascinating and lived up to the title. There are two types of readers to whom this content will appeal, people who know something of the American justice system or those interested in it in the first place. A plain interest in junk science will not endear its content because of the routes it takes.
It is extremely scary to imagine being in the shoes of those innocent people who were put on death row or closed just because the lead officer decided it made sense. I have been a fan of American Crime shows before, and some of the takeaways I subconsciously gathered from them were highlighted in this story.
The narrator did a great job of bringing the incredulity on the part of the defence when 'scientists' spoke the way they did to the forefront. The only drawback with the format of the book was the back and forth when it came to the cases and the progression of the science. One has to remember who's who and their cases since their journey's conclusion is only discussed at the very end. Unfortunately, not all have happy endings.
It was an illuminating book, but I just wish it had been a little easier to follow or linear. I think much of this content will already be familiar to activists in this field. It is pretty heavy for an average consumer. That is something one must know going in. Heavy in terms of what is at stake for the people concerned!
I received an ARC thanks to NetGalley and the publishers, but the review is entirely based on my own reading experience.
The author has two important storylines to convey. One is the rise of Junk Science and the acceptance of it in the court of law. The other contains the stories of individuals who might have or were helped when the truth came to light about the evidence used to convict them in the first place.
It was fascinating and lived up to the title. There are two types of readers to whom this content will appeal, people who know something of the American justice system or those interested in it in the first place. A plain interest in junk science will not endear its content because of the routes it takes.
It is extremely scary to imagine being in the shoes of those innocent people who were put on death row or closed just because the lead officer decided it made sense. I have been a fan of American Crime shows before, and some of the takeaways I subconsciously gathered from them were highlighted in this story.
The narrator did a great job of bringing the incredulity on the part of the defence when 'scientists' spoke the way they did to the forefront. The only drawback with the format of the book was the back and forth when it came to the cases and the progression of the science. One has to remember who's who and their cases since their journey's conclusion is only discussed at the very end. Unfortunately, not all have happy endings.
It was an illuminating book, but I just wish it had been a little easier to follow or linear. I think much of this content will already be familiar to activists in this field. It is pretty heavy for an average consumer. That is something one must know going in. Heavy in terms of what is at stake for the people concerned!
I received an ARC thanks to NetGalley and the publishers, but the review is entirely based on my own reading experience.
August 10, 2022
I struggle to rate this book. I am enamored with the work that the Innocence Project does and frankly, the work of any post conviction attorney. I am constantly reading articles on Innocence Project attorneys and cases. So, I picked this book up thinking it would be totally up my alley. It was, and the content is extremely important and interesting. This is a topic that deserves national attention and should be required reading for every judge. I find the bite mark discourse fascinating, and I loved the anecdotes about other junk science such as arson detection (though, beware, this book is almost exclusively centered around the bite mark discourse. I didn’t mind but other reviewers seemed to).
My only complaint, and from the other reviews I see I am not alone, is really how the whole thing was told. I respect the creative process but the organization of this book was incredibly tough for me to follow and frankly became frustrating at times. I was constantly flipping back and forth to check names because there were so many people to keep track of and the stories of the exonerated would appear randomly throughout, after you’ve forgotten exactly what their story is, so I’d have to flip back and re-read.
I am not faulting Mr. Fabricant for the organization at all. It’s his book. This important and fascinating content trumps the organization. Hopefully this book sparks a few more Innocence Project attorneys and supporters. It’s really amazing work.
My only complaint, and from the other reviews I see I am not alone, is really how the whole thing was told. I respect the creative process but the organization of this book was incredibly tough for me to follow and frankly became frustrating at times. I was constantly flipping back and forth to check names because there were so many people to keep track of and the stories of the exonerated would appear randomly throughout, after you’ve forgotten exactly what their story is, so I’d have to flip back and re-read.
I am not faulting Mr. Fabricant for the organization at all. It’s his book. This important and fascinating content trumps the organization. Hopefully this book sparks a few more Innocence Project attorneys and supporters. It’s really amazing work.
April 30, 2022
Perseverance and Hope
I was stunned to read the truth being the hype of modern fake science and the tragedies of people's lives that were stomped on for other's greed and looking for prestige at any price.
I was inspired by the work of many lawyers in the Innocence Project seeking justice for the forgotten.
The author's writing style is riveting. I could not put the book down!
This book is definitely a Must Read!
I was stunned to read the truth being the hype of modern fake science and the tragedies of people's lives that were stomped on for other's greed and looking for prestige at any price.
I was inspired by the work of many lawyers in the Innocence Project seeking justice for the forgotten.
The author's writing style is riveting. I could not put the book down!
This book is definitely a Must Read!
July 18, 2022
This is a must read for anyone who takes forensic "science" at face value, or who is still questioning whether racism is pervasive in our justice system. Follow the money. Follow the power. The only question I'm left asking is how will we ever make it stop? Kudos to Chris Fabricant and everyone involved with the the Innocence Project.
April 30, 2023
M. Chris Fabricant is the Director of Strategic Litigation at The Innocence Project, a masterful storyteller and a compassionate attorney. He tells the story of how unreliable "science" has been used to destroy the lives of many innocent people and how he (and others at the Innocence Project) has been able to come along some of those innocent people and help them overcome a corrupt system and regain their freedom. In wading through this piece I both listened and read. Having the book in hand we are able to see pictures of the people affected. Chris Henry Coffey does a great job of narrating the audio version. Chris Fabricant is based out of New York but he works with a friend of mine in Iowa on local cases so I have heard of him on a personal level. My husband and I were able to hear him speak at our public library yesterday. If I were unfortunate enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and be accused of things I have not done I would want Chris on my side. He is a humble and determined man who truly cares about those that society has wronged and shoved aside. https://innocenceproject.org/about/
September 2, 2025
1 Sept 2025: I’ve studied forensic science throughout high school and college and have a good understanding on how DNA evidence has revealed the endless nature of the criminal justice system’s flaws (particularly involving its reliance on forensic evidence with no scientific basis). But this book still managed to completely kill any instinct I might have had as the kid obsessed with Forensic Files. It’s a great mix of narrative and case study, examining popular and, more importantly, countless, unpopular cases that have been influenced by “junk science,” usually in ways that have subjugated innocent people to never-ending imprisonments. A great reminder of what I hope to fight against as a lawyer: wrongful convictions that target poor people of color.
April 4, 2022
😐
This is not the book I was expecting.
BACKGROUND: I am a lawyer and I went to law school for two reasons (or well, there were to legal things that motivated or inspired me) the first being Loving v. Virginia case and the innocence project— specifically I dreamed of working for the innocence project (I had been very moved as a young person when I heard a gentlemen speak who had been wrongly convicted and then freed thanks to DNA and the project)
Point is, I seem to be the bullseye 🎯 in the target audience (especially when you consider The Brain Defense is still one of my favorite nonfiction books) and yet I struggled with this.
Mostly I was expecting a book that discussed (a chapter for each) the various types of junk science (notably “expert testimony”, microscopic hair comparison, and bite marks) how they are employed/the history and why they are not credible or are extremely biased + real-life example cases that can demonstrate these points. (To be fair, there are 3 (?) cases the author worked on that are threaded through the book.)
Here there isn’t much “explaining” or “facts” about junk science, rather it’s more a short, cliff note summary of a few cases where “junk science” was used in court and it led to a wrongful conviction.
For example, there was DNA evidence on the victim, however that evidence wasn’t used to convict, rather bite marks were used to convict even though the person who was accused of making those bite marks didn’t match the DNA. the person whose DNA it was then, sadly, went on to harm many more victims.
Bottom line summary: anything that isn’t DNA evidence shouldn’t be used. Cases, particularly with life or death sentences cannot only rely on non DNA “evidence”
In other words, CSI isn’t really in the courtroom the way you think and often “forensic evidence” is used to convince minorities and worse still, objections to the “junk science” go unchallenged in trial and (basically) cannot be appealed.
Takeaway thoughts:
I have also found it odd (and maybe now troubling as well) that both sides can hire experts. In the UK, for example, the court appoints an expert. Seems less risk of bias and a stronger likelihood for truthfulness; after all of you’re being paid $10,000 a day, wouldn’t you feel motivated to agree with the point you’re being hired to make?
I’m also bothered that the FBI realized Microscopic hair comparison is very unreliable (dozens of cases were reviewed and overturned) and yet this evidence is still allowed!
Note: The Staircase (a documentary on Netflix) is a fairly good example of junk science by “expert testimony” — an agents testimony about what happened, what blood splatter, etc meant was a key aspect that led to a conviction. Many years later it was revealed this guy fabricated evidence, faked tests, lied on the witness stand, and did other things. Some 24 (?) cases he was involved with were reopened and many overturned because of his false “junk science.”
GOD BLESS THE GOOD HUMANS AT THE INNOCENCE PROJECT
Thank you netgalley for the ARC.
This is not the book I was expecting.
BACKGROUND: I am a lawyer and I went to law school for two reasons (or well, there were to legal things that motivated or inspired me) the first being Loving v. Virginia case and the innocence project— specifically I dreamed of working for the innocence project (I had been very moved as a young person when I heard a gentlemen speak who had been wrongly convicted and then freed thanks to DNA and the project)
Point is, I seem to be the bullseye 🎯 in the target audience (especially when you consider The Brain Defense is still one of my favorite nonfiction books) and yet I struggled with this.
Mostly I was expecting a book that discussed (a chapter for each) the various types of junk science (notably “expert testimony”, microscopic hair comparison, and bite marks) how they are employed/the history and why they are not credible or are extremely biased + real-life example cases that can demonstrate these points. (To be fair, there are 3 (?) cases the author worked on that are threaded through the book.)
Here there isn’t much “explaining” or “facts” about junk science, rather it’s more a short, cliff note summary of a few cases where “junk science” was used in court and it led to a wrongful conviction.
For example, there was DNA evidence on the victim, however that evidence wasn’t used to convict, rather bite marks were used to convict even though the person who was accused of making those bite marks didn’t match the DNA. the person whose DNA it was then, sadly, went on to harm many more victims.
Bottom line summary: anything that isn’t DNA evidence shouldn’t be used. Cases, particularly with life or death sentences cannot only rely on non DNA “evidence”
In other words, CSI isn’t really in the courtroom the way you think and often “forensic evidence” is used to convince minorities and worse still, objections to the “junk science” go unchallenged in trial and (basically) cannot be appealed.
Takeaway thoughts:
I have also found it odd (and maybe now troubling as well) that both sides can hire experts. In the UK, for example, the court appoints an expert. Seems less risk of bias and a stronger likelihood for truthfulness; after all of you’re being paid $10,000 a day, wouldn’t you feel motivated to agree with the point you’re being hired to make?
I’m also bothered that the FBI realized Microscopic hair comparison is very unreliable (dozens of cases were reviewed and overturned) and yet this evidence is still allowed!
Note: The Staircase (a documentary on Netflix) is a fairly good example of junk science by “expert testimony” — an agents testimony about what happened, what blood splatter, etc meant was a key aspect that led to a conviction. Many years later it was revealed this guy fabricated evidence, faked tests, lied on the witness stand, and did other things. Some 24 (?) cases he was involved with were reopened and many overturned because of his false “junk science.”
GOD BLESS THE GOOD HUMANS AT THE INNOCENCE PROJECT
Thank you netgalley for the ARC.
October 22, 2023
In short, this book is the scattered younger brother of Just Mercy (i.e., Bryan Stevenson walked so M. Chris Fabricant could run).
I ended up loving this book, but I will admit that the title and synopses were misleading. I was expecting more of a review of types of forensic evidence and their reliability/validity more broadly, and this book is a somewhat disjointed narrative of the history of forensic odontology and its relation to key cases that Fabricant worked on. Again, I did end up enjoying this book a lot and learned so much, but it was primarily about bite mark evidence (with a couple lil sprinkles of other forensic science methods). Anyway, Fabricant laid out a comprehensive narrative of the (lack of) evidence for bite marks this book is so worth the read, but I think the title should be more related to junk science as it pertains to forensic odontology haha
I ended up loving this book, but I will admit that the title and synopses were misleading. I was expecting more of a review of types of forensic evidence and their reliability/validity more broadly, and this book is a somewhat disjointed narrative of the history of forensic odontology and its relation to key cases that Fabricant worked on. Again, I did end up enjoying this book a lot and learned so much, but it was primarily about bite mark evidence (with a couple lil sprinkles of other forensic science methods). Anyway, Fabricant laid out a comprehensive narrative of the (lack of) evidence for bite marks this book is so worth the read, but I think the title should be more related to junk science as it pertains to forensic odontology haha
July 12, 2024
This was an intriguing look at "junk science" (bite marks in particular) and its roll in wrongful convictions.
The book jumped around in focus a little, which at times made it a challenge to follow. Overall, though, it was highly informative and well-told.
In my personal opinion, lawyers bear the responsibility for creating the "expert class" that, in turn, led to junk science in the first place. It's sad that prosecutions have often become about winning and not about truth and justice. The author was pretty politicized at the end, which is why I rated four stars rather than five.
The book jumped around in focus a little, which at times made it a challenge to follow. Overall, though, it was highly informative and well-told.
In my personal opinion, lawyers bear the responsibility for creating the "expert class" that, in turn, led to junk science in the first place. It's sad that prosecutions have often become about winning and not about truth and justice. The author was pretty politicized at the end, which is why I rated four stars rather than five.
April 18, 2022
Thanks to NetGalley for the audiobook ARC!
As a true-crime enthusiast, I found this book to be rather fascinating. As a someone who believes that doing things the way we've always done them is usually a recipe for disaster, I found it rather insightful. I was fascinated by all of the cases the authors dug into, some of which I was already familiar with. And I found the author's conclusions and suggestions for improvement to be well thought out. Definitely a must-read for crime and punishment enthusiasts.
As a true-crime enthusiast, I found this book to be rather fascinating. As a someone who believes that doing things the way we've always done them is usually a recipe for disaster, I found it rather insightful. I was fascinated by all of the cases the authors dug into, some of which I was already familiar with. And I found the author's conclusions and suggestions for improvement to be well thought out. Definitely a must-read for crime and punishment enthusiasts.
December 12, 2022
Yes, we've all been hoodwinked by forensic "science" that really isn't. Yet the most disturbing part of this book is the wasted lives tortured by the application of this voodoo science. Do the perpetrators of this unsubstantiated baloney have any conscience at all? And preserve us from the backward states in this country that refuse to allow innocent people to be freed despite the clear miscarriage of justice.
Thank you to the Innocence Project for bringing out the truth. So many innocent people and so many criminals still at large... We live in a scary times. Just arrest the usual suspects to set people's minds at ease, and let the killers go on killing!
Thank you to the Innocence Project for bringing out the truth. So many innocent people and so many criminals still at large... We live in a scary times. Just arrest the usual suspects to set people's minds at ease, and let the killers go on killing!
August 30, 2024
My goodness, what prosecutors have gotten away with over the years and still today is absolutely maddening. And let's talk about the principle of finality, especially in instances where there is clear and undeniable proof that the defendent is innocent.
This book suffered from some editing issues, but such an important book and worth the attention.
This book suffered from some editing issues, but such an important book and worth the attention.
May 26, 2022
Bite mark identification is the sole subject of this book and I noped out pretty quick cause the writing's not very good and the structure is terrible.
December 18, 2022
Fabricant works for the Innocence Project, devoted to using research and updated scientific techniques to free wrongly convicted prisoners. This book details some of the cases he has been involved in, particularly ones where people have been convicted based on pseudoscience.
The presentation makes it sound like a more detailed history of the use of 'junk science' in forensics (which it only somewhat touches on, focusing on the use of 'bite marks' to identify perpetrators). The books is also scattered in its presentation and could have used a stronger editor. Still, it's a powerful and informative book.
The presentation makes it sound like a more detailed history of the use of 'junk science' in forensics (which it only somewhat touches on, focusing on the use of 'bite marks' to identify perpetrators). The books is also scattered in its presentation and could have used a stronger editor. Still, it's a powerful and informative book.
December 23, 2022
Breathtaking
This was a fascinating, educational book. I couldn’t put it down. I worked for a fire department at one time and I was surprised to learn that all I knew about arson fires was wrong!!
This was a fascinating, educational book. I couldn’t put it down. I worked for a fire department at one time and I was surprised to learn that all I knew about arson fires was wrong!!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 178 reviews