For 40 years the FBI has been providing what is called bullet lead analysis in order to aid prosecutors who are trying to link a bullet found at a crime scene with a box of bullets owned by a suspect. This form of forensic analysis has helped convict scores of people—but it has one big problem: the science is faulty.
The FBI has known their methods are undependable for nearly four years. But what have they done with the information that could potentially affect so many cases–and lives? Not much.
A six-month investigation by 60 Minutes and The Washington Post shows that there are hundreds of defendants imprisoned around the country who were convicted with the help of a now discredited forensic tool, and that the FBI never notified them, their lawyers, or the courts, that the their cases may have been affected by faulty testimony.
The full story is here.
PS: My old pal, John Miller, formerly of the LAPD, now the FBI’s spokesdude says that the Feebs will make sure all is rectified now.
So, there was a consensus that the science was correct but now we’re finding the government was wrong to push that idea because we later found that it was wrong and that the science is faulty and has created significant and unnecessary costs to many people.
Why does this sound familiar?
The analysis of the bullets at Dealy Plaza was done at UCI using a technique called “Neutron Activation Analysis” Samples were irradiated in the research reactor and then examined for the signature radiation given off. Its quite accurate. BTW the same method was used on locks of Napolean’s hair and proved that he was not poisoned by arsenic as some historians claimed.
I thought that recovered bullet fragments and subsequent lead bullet lead compositional tests were only used as circumstantial evidence, not hard evidence in criminal cases. This would be analogous to fiber testing, where you can tell if a fiber came from a manufacturing “run/lot†of carpets but not a specific carpet. Also the FBI press releases and the CBS news story, differ on how this evidence was used in court cases and the number of times it was actually used.
There is a big difference in determining if a bullet came from a specific box of bullets or a specific manufacturing plant or manufacturing “lot†of bullets.
http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel04/bullet021004.htm
http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel05/bullet_lead_analysis.htm
If there is lead in our bullets, are they manufactured as children’s toys in China?
[…] story is a interesting offshoot of the 60 Minutes bullet lead analysis story I posted about […]