Five Disturbing Things You Didn’t Know About Forensic “Science”
By Jordan Smith,
The Intercept
| 04. 24. 2015
Last week, The Washington Post revealed that in 268 trials dating back to 1972, 26 out of 28 examiners within the FBI Laboratory’s microscopic hair comparison unit “overstated forensic matches in a way that favored prosecutors in more than 95 percent” of the cases. These included cases where 14 people have since been either executed or died in prison.
The hair analysis review — the largest-ever post-conviction review of questionable forensic evidence by the FBI — has been ongoing since 2012. The review is a joint effort by the FBI, Innocence Project and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. The preliminary results announced last week represent just a small percentage of the nearly 3,000 criminal cases in which the FBI hair examiners may have provided analysis. Of the 329 DNA exonerations to date, 74 involved flawed hair evidence analysis.
While these revelations are certainly disturbing — and the implications alarming — the reality is that they represent the tip of the iceberg when it comes to flawed forensics.
In a landmark 2009 report, the National Academy of Sciences concluded that, aside from DNA, there was...
Related Articles
By Carly Mallenbaum, Axios [cites Emily Galpern] | 03.29.2026
More Americans are turning to surrogacy to build their families, as the practice becomes more common and more publicly discussed.
Why it matters: As surrogacy becomes more visible and accessible, ethical, legal and cultural tensions become harder to ignore...
By Carly Mallenbaum, Axios [cites Surrogacy360] | 03.29.2026
Without a federal law, surrogacy in the U.S. is governed by a patchwork of state regulations/
Why it matters: Confusing, varied local rules can determine everything from whether agreements are legally binding to who is recognized as a parent at...
Cathy Tie seems to be good at starting businesses but not so dedicated to maintaining them. CGS, like many others, first heard of her thanks to Caiwei Chen and Antonio Regalado in MIT Technology Review, May 2025, as the partner (perhaps bride) of the notorious Chinese scientist He Jiankui, described in the headline as “China’s Frankenstein.” He prefers “Chinese Darwin.” She ran his Twitter account for a while, contributing such gems as:
Get in luddite, we’re going gene editing...
By Laura DeFrancesco, Nature Biotechnology | 03.17.2026
The first gene editors designed to fix genetic lesions in mutation-agnostic ways are poised to enter the clinic. Tessera Therapeutics and Alltrna, two Flagship Pioneering-funded companies, are gearing up to test novel genetic medicines in humans. Tessera received regulatory clearance...
