by blogger bcs
Mark Dallagher was convicted of murdering an elderly woman based on an ear print mark left on the window. Cornelis Van der Lugt, a Dutch ear expert, testified that there was "a unique match" between Dallagher's ear and the impression left on the victim's window. Eight years later Dallagher's conviction was overturned, not because the prosecution all of a sudden doubted the validity of the ear impression testimony, but ultimately because DNA taken from the ear impression did not match Mr. Dallagher. Thanks to the erroneous testimony of Mr. Van der Lugt an innocent man was locked up for crime he did not committ.This article shows yet another example of an over zealous scientist testifying in court about ear mark evidence, when its validity has not been researched or peer reviewed.
|"The validity of ear identification is unknown. The research that is necessary to say anything on the validity of ear identification has not been conducted."|