← All Cases / Episode #394
The Case of Junk Science - Hair Microscopy Evidence
📻 Episode #394
🎙️ Hosted by Jason Flom
📅 Oct 02, 2023
About This Episode
Even when examined under a microscope, the similarities that can be observed between two hairs are open to wide interpretation, there are no definitive traits that can prove with any scientific certainty that a suspect’s hair matches a hair found at a crime scene. Yet hair comparison analysis was still being used to falsely identify…
The Case
Even when examined under a microscope, the similarities that can be observed between two hairs are open to wide interpretation, there are no definitive traits that can prove with any scientific certainty that a suspect’s hair matches a hair found at a crime scene. Yet hair comparison analysis was still being used to falsely identify and convict innocent people up until the year 2000 and people are still incarcerated who were convicted based on this false evidence.
So how did this evidence get admitted into courts in the first place?
Josh Dubin speaks with Vanessa Antoun, Senior Resource Counsel at the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) to learn about Hair Microscopy Evidence.
Kate Judson, Executive Director of the Center for Integrity in Forensic Sciences, updates Josh Dubin's Wrongful Conviction: Junk Science.
https://cifsjustice.org/donate/
https://www.nacdl.org/
In Their Own Words — transcript excerpts
Short excerpts from the episode's official published transcript, with timestamps — listen from these moments, or read the full transcript via the podcast's own platforms.
00:04:19“Speaker 2: two agonizing years, your case goes to trial. You want Speaker 2: to get your life back. You didn't kill anyone. You Speaker 2: were in that same basement all night when someone else Speaker 2: climbed your neighbors steps and ended his life with a Speaker 2: single gunshot blast of the head. A few weeks ago,”
00:17:14“Speaker 4: evidence of someone's presence in a certain location or with Speaker 4: a certain person. When that is one of the few Speaker 4: pieces of evidence you have, obviously you want to pursue that. Speaker 4: And a lot of these cases, not all, but a Speaker 4: lot of them were in pre DNA times, so this”
00:29:29“Speaker 4: using certain techniques are needed as tools to quote unquote Speaker 4: catch the bad guys, which is still a conversation that's Speaker 4: going on with forensic science today. That's the fear that Speaker 4: law enforcement won't have the tools they need to catch Speaker 4: people or to convict people. And the appropriate response should be, well,”
Listen to the Episode
🎧 Listen on Omny / the podcast's platforms
Resources & links from the episode:
Share this case, follow the organisations working on it, and support the podcast's fight for the innocent at lavaforgood.com.
← #393 Patrick Brown #395 Sullivan Walter →
Also on the podcast: #145 Junk Science - Bite Mark Evidence · #147 Junk Science - Bloodstain Pattern Evidence · #149 Junk Science - Arson Evidence