Episode 181 – Fingerprint Analogies

    Fingerprint AnalogiesFingerprint Analogies

Eric Ray and Glenn Langenburg begin the episode with a discussion of an article from a law journal by Barbara Spellman titled, Communicating Forensic Evidence: Lessons from Psychological Science. Among her main points are that statistics, likelihood rations, and random match probabilities are terrible ways of communicating information to juries. She goes on to say that there are a number of misconceptions in latent fingerprint comparisons that must be addressed to juries and that analogies might be a better way to convey information to them. While Glenn and Eric agree and disagree with some of those points, they conclude the episode by reviewing a number of their favorite analogies that they use when testifying or teaching.

Double Loop Podcast with Glenn Langenburg and Eric Ray
Podcast for Latent Print Examiners
Your source for everything about fingerprints
While you’re working on your comparisons, we’ll talk about comparisons

Episode 164 – Alicia Wilcox Interview – Part 2

Alicia Wilcox Interview - Part 2

Alicia Wilcox Interview – Part 2

Eric Ray and Glenn Langenburg continue their discussion with Alicia Wilcox on her research into how juries hear forensic testimony. This time we focus even more on questions of opposing experts, error rates, and what’s the most important thing for an expert to have. A degree? Years of experience? An accredited lab?

Double Loop Podcast with Glenn Langenburg and Eric Ray
Podcast for Latent Print Examiners
Your source for everything about fingerprints
While you’re working on your comparisons, we’ll talk about comparisons

Episode 163 – Alicia Wilcox Interview – Part 1

Alicia Wilcox Interview - Part 1

Alicia Wilcox Interview – Part 1

Glenn Langenburg and Eric Ray join with Dr. Alicia Wilcox from Husson University in Bangor, Maine in a discussion of her research juries and their understanding of forensic testimony. Even though forensic scientists may try to present data in precise and sometimes mathematical way, jurors tend to interpret forensic testimony according to whether the evidence fits well into the story that they have constructed of the crime.

Double Loop Podcast with Glenn Langenburg and Eric Ray
Podcast for Latent Print Examiners
Your source for everything about fingerprints
While you’re working on your comparisons, we’ll talk about comparisons

Episode 161 – Koehler Error Rate Article

Koehler Error Rate Article

Koehler Error Rate Article

Glenn Langenburg and Eric Ray follow up from last week’s discussion of Glenn’s recent Daubert hearing with a 2016 article from Jonathan Koehler entitled, Intuitive Error Rate Estimates for the Forensic Sciences. As Glenn suspected, the findings of this article are suspiciously close to the center of the group of choices that participants were presented with. Although there are some larger themes that are interesting, the exact values of the error rate estimates from potential jurors do not match personal experience or even some of the cited prior works.

Double Loop Podcast with Glenn Langenburg and Eric Ray
Podcast for Latent Print Examiners
Your source for everything about fingerprints
While you’re working on your comparisons, we’ll talk about comparisons

Episode 155 – 2017 ICFIS Part 1

2017 ICFIS Part 1

2017 ICFIS Part 1

Glenn discusses the recent 2017 International Conference on Forensic Inference and Statistics that was held in Minnesota. Specifically, Glenn helped lead a project that looked at how lay people from different backgrounds interpreted different types of forensic results and how those interpretations were used in a courtroom setting.

Double Loop Podcast with Glenn Langenburg and Eric Ray
Podcast for Latent Print Examiners
Your source for everything about fingerprints
While you’re working on your comparisons, we’ll talk about comparisons