Surveying practicing firearm examiners.

Nicholas Scurich, Brandon L Garrett, Robert M Thompson
Author Information
  1. Nicholas Scurich: University of California, Irvine, USA.
  2. Brandon L Garrett: Duke University, School of Law, USA.
  3. Robert M Thompson: National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA.

Abstract

A sample (n = 79) of practicing firearm and toolmark examiners was queried about casework as well as their views about the potential role that statistics might play in future firearm examinations and expert witness testimony. Principal findings include: The modal response for time spent conducting bullet examinations is 2-4 hours, and the modal response for cartridge casings is 1-2 hours. The average participant (median) makes an identification in 65% of casework, makes an elimination in 12% of casework, and reports that the examination was inconclusive in 20% of casework calls. The vast majority of examiners work at laboratories that permit eliminations when class characteristics agree. The reported industry-wide false positive error rate is 1%, though very few participants could name a study or give a citation for their reported estimate. Qualitative responses about the potential role of statistics were mixed.

Keywords

References

  1. J Forensic Sci. 2007 May;52(3):586-94 [PMID: 17456086]
  2. Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2020 Dec 21;2:703-704 [PMID: 33385151]
  3. Sci Justice. 2020 May;60(3):216-224 [PMID: 32381238]
  4. J Forensic Sci. 2016 Jul;61(4):939-46 [PMID: 27135174]
  5. Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2020 Sep 06;2:333-338 [PMID: 33385131]
  6. Forensic Sci Int. 2020 Mar;308:110158 [PMID: 32028120]
  7. Forensic Sci Int. 2020 Feb;307:110112 [PMID: 31881373]
  8. J Forensic Sci. 2021 Mar;66(2):557-570 [PMID: 33104255]
  9. Forensic Sci Int. 2019 Sep;302:109887 [PMID: 31404811]
  10. Forensic Sci Int. 2021 Apr;321:110714 [PMID: 33592556]
  11. Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2020 Dec 21;2:701-702 [PMID: 33385150]
  12. Law Hum Behav. 2020 Oct;44(5):412-423 [PMID: 33090867]
  13. Forensic Sci Int. 2018 Aug;289:215-222 [PMID: 29933202]
  14. Sci Justice. 2020 Sep;60(5):406-414 [PMID: 32873380]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0caseworkfirearmexaminerspracticingpotentialrolestatisticsexaminationstestimonymodalresponsemakesexaminationreportedForensicsamplen = 79toolmarkqueriedwellviewsmightplayfutureexpertwitnessPrincipalfindingsinclude:timespentconductingbullet2-4 hourscartridgecasings1-2 hoursaverageparticipantmedianidentification65%elimination12%reportsinconclusive20%callsvastmajorityworklaboratoriespermiteliminationsclasscharacteristicsagreeindustry-widefalsepositiveerrorrate1%thoughparticipantsnamestudygivecitationestimateQualitativeresponsesmixedSurveyingErrorratesExpertFirearmstoolmarksconclusionsscience

Similar Articles

Cited By