Campbell, T. W. (2014). Review of: Bowers, C. M. (2014).

Forensic testimony: Science, Law,

and Expert Evidence. Academic Press, Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology, 6, R1-
R4.
Book Review
Forensic Testimony: Science, Law and Expert Evidence

Bowers, C. M., (2013). Forensic Testimony: Science, Law and Expert Evidence, New York:
Academic Press. 296 pages. $99.95.

Author: Terence W. Campbell, Ph.D.

Keywords: forensic science, forensic psychology, forensic testimony


Authored by forensic dentist C. Michael Bowers, Forensic Testimony focuses considerably on
the 2009 report of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) titled, "Strengthening Forensic
Science in the United States: A Path Forward." The Hon. Harry Edwards' 2010 Jurimetrics
article, "The National Academy of Sciences Report on Forensic Sciences: What it Means for
the Bench and Bar," provides the book's Introduction.

Reliability Threats to Forensic Science

Edwards identified various factors that compromise the reliability of forensic science. The
factors that could apply to forensic psychology are:

the paucity of scientific research to confirm the validity and reliability of
forensic disciplines and establish quantifiable measures of uncertainty in the
conclusions of forensic analyses;

the absence of rigorous, mandatory certification requirements for
practitioners;

the failure of forensic experts to use standard terminology in reporting on and
testifying about the results of forensic science investigations;

the lack of effective oversight;

a gross shortage of adequate training and continuing education for
practitioners (p. xxi).

Forensic Psychology and Psychological Science

While especially deploring the procedures of the FBI Laboratory in bullet lead and hair
analyses, Bowers also castigated other practices such as bite mark analysis, fingerprint
evidence, ballistics, and arson investigations. Clearly, however, these problems correspond to
relying on the physical sciences for forensic purposes. Therefore, what is their relevance to
forensic psychology and social science data? Consider, for example, testimony before the
U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. One witness described forensic science

OAJFP ISSN 1948-5115 Volume 6. 2014
R2
representing "a system plagued by a paucity of good research, fragmentation, inconsistent
practices, and weak governance" (p. 24). If subjected to the scrutiny of the National Academy
of Sciences, would forensic psychology suffer a similar verdict?

Bowers quoted from the 2009 NAS report indicating, "the law's greatest dilemma in its heavy
reliance on forensic evidence concerns the question of whether and to what extent there is any
science in any given forensic discipline" (p. 24). This observation necessitates asking to what
extent forensic psychology relies on psychological science.

Forensic Psychology and Family Law

In family law matters, psychologist-attorney Christopher Barden insists that mental-health
professionals routinely misinform and mislead legal proceedings. In his 2013 chaptertitled
"Protecting the Integrity of the Family Law System"that appears in Parental Alienation: The
Handbook for Mental Health and Legal Professionals, Barden contends:

Although unknown to most family lawyers and clinical experts, it is well-
documented in widely available peer-reviewed, published, scientific journal
articles that many of the methods currently employed by mental health experts in
family law cases are unreliable, controversial, or unethical thus failing basic Frye
or Daubert analyses (p. 270).

Barden continued to chastise mental-health professionals who involve themselves in family law
matters while neglecting to consider the appropriateness of their findings and
recommendations.

Many family law-affiliated mental health professionals currently rely on unsound,
unscientific practices (e.g., failing to disclose controversies regarding unreliable
clinical judgments; failing to disclose regarding forms of psychotherapy; failing
to disclose controversies regarding projective tests, drawing tests, and other
errors) because they lack basic knowledge in scientific methodology (p. 271).

Barden quoted Eleanor Maccoby challenging psychological testing in family law matters.

Standard measures of parents' and children's intelligence, personality traits, and
emotional states are wholly inappropriate for custody evaluations, and that even
the measures and constructs that have been designed specifically to assess
child custody arrangements for individual children have no proven validity as
predictors of a child's well-being in the care of one or the other of two disputing
parents (p. 274).

If forensic psychology rests on such shaky ground in family law matters, then our courts are
guilty of duplicitous passivity. Addressing the bench's unresponsiveness, Bowers quoted from
Jennifer Mnookin's February 2009 Op-Ed article in the L.A. Times.


OAJFP ISSN 1948-5115 Volume 6. 2014
R3
The courts have almost entirely turned a deaf ear to these [problems], essentially
giving forensic science and its practices a free pass, simply because they've
been part of the judicial system for so long. . . . The findings of the National
Academy of Sciences should spur judges to require higher standards (p. xxxiii).

To the extent that courts have given a "free pass" to forensic psychology, especially in family
law settings, higher standards are also needed. Though not dwelling on forensic psychology in
any depth, Forensic Testimony is relevant for forensic psychologists as a result of addressing
broad, inclusive issues related to our field. The book is well written, logically organized, and an
overall good read. I highly recommend it.


OAJFP ISSN 1948-5115 Volume 6. 2014
R4
References

Barden, R.C. (2013). Protecting the integrity of the family law system: Multidisciplinary
processes and family law reform. In D. Loarandos, W. Bernet, & S.R. Sauber (Eds.)
Parental alienation: The handbook for mental health professionals. Springfield, IL:
Charles C. Thomas.

Edwards, Harry T. (2010, May). The National Academy of Sciences report on forensic
sciences: What it means for the bench and bar. Presentation at the conference The
Role of the Court in an Age of Developing Science and Technology, sponsored by the
Superior Court of the District of Columbia, Washington, D.C.

National Research Counsel of the National Academies (2009). Strengthening forensic science
in the United States: A path forward. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.