Bite Mark Analysis Fair Basis For Criminal Conviction?
A forensic dentistry methodology known as bite mark analysis came up in the news today. The story is about a former Akron, Ohio, police captain who has spent 14 years in prison for allegedly murdering his wife. It appears that bite mark analysis was the sole evidence supporting the charges against him. The Ohio Innocence Project is working to get him exonerated.
The story raises an obvious question in my mind. How can evidence derived from a very controversial forensics methodology be used to convict a person of a crime with no other evidence to support the charges? It seems to me that the the controversial nature of the methodology should raise the “reasonable doubt” question in our innocent-until-proven-guilty criminal justice system.
Until the controversy is resolved, no one should be convicted solely on bite mark analysis.