THE CURRENT STATE OF BULLET-LEAD EVIDENCE

This article describes recent opinions on the admissibility of bullet-lead evidence. In 2004, the National Research Council released a report identifying certain problems with this type of evidence and making recommendations for improvements in the analytical procedure, the interpretation of a match...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:	Jurimetrics (Chicago, Ill.) Ill.), 2006-10, Vol.47 (1), p.99-114
1. Verfasser:	Kaye, D.H.
Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	eng
Schlagworte:	Ammunition Bullets COMMENTARY Defendants Juries Lead Legal evidence Manufacturing processes Music analysis Recommendations Standard deviation
Online-Zugang:	Volltext
Tags:	Tag hinzufügen Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!

container_end_page	114
container_issue	1
container_start_page	99
container_title	Jurimetrics (Chicago, Ill.)
container_volume	47
creator	Kaye, D.H.
description	This article describes recent opinions on the admissibility of bullet-lead evidence. In 2004, the National Research Council released a report identifying certain problems with this type of evidence and making recommendations for improvements in the analytical procedure, the interpretation of a match among bullet fragments, and the presentation of the laboratory findings in court. Even if the testimony were as circumspect as called for in the NRC report, however, it might not have sufficient value to the jury to warrant its admission. In any event, the FBI has stopped performing the procedure, and it appears that in any retrials involving previous testimony, the courts will view the past testimony of FBI examiners more skeptically.
format	Article
fullrecord	<record><control><sourceid>jstor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_jstor_primary_29762960</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>29762960</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>29762960</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-jstor_primary_297629603</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpjYuA0MjQ10TUxNjFhYeA0sLA01zU0MjfnYOAqLs4yMDCyMDM14WTQDPFwVXAODQpy9QtRCA5xDHFV8HdTcAr18XEN0fVxdXRRcA3zdHH1c3blYWBNS8wpTuWF0twMsm6uIc4eulnFJflF8QVFmbmJRZXxRpbmZkaWZgbGhOQBmzUpEw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>THE CURRENT STATE OF BULLET-LEAD EVIDENCE</title><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Kaye, D.H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Kaye, D.H.</creatorcontrib><description>This article describes recent opinions on the admissibility of bullet-lead evidence. In 2004, the National Research Council released a report identifying certain problems with this type of evidence and making recommendations for improvements in the analytical procedure, the interpretation of a match among bullet fragments, and the presentation of the laboratory findings in court. Even if the testimony were as circumspect as called for in the NRC report, however, it might not have sufficient value to the jury to warrant its admission. In any event, the FBI has stopped performing the procedure, and it appears that in any retrials involving previous testimony, the courts will view the past testimony of FBI examiners more skeptically.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0897-1277</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2154-4344</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>American Bar Association</publisher><subject>Ammunition ; Bullets ; COMMENTARY ; Defendants ; Juries ; Lead ; Legal evidence ; Manufacturing processes ; Music analysis ; Recommendations ; Standard deviation</subject><ispartof>Jurimetrics (Chicago, Ill.), 2006-10, Vol.47 (1), p.99-114</ispartof><rights>2006 American Bar Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/29762960$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/29762960$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kaye, D.H.</creatorcontrib><title>THE CURRENT STATE OF BULLET-LEAD EVIDENCE</title><title>Jurimetrics (Chicago, Ill.)</title><description>This article describes recent opinions on the admissibility of bullet-lead evidence. In 2004, the National Research Council released a report identifying certain problems with this type of evidence and making recommendations for improvements in the analytical procedure, the interpretation of a match among bullet fragments, and the presentation of the laboratory findings in court. Even if the testimony were as circumspect as called for in the NRC report, however, it might not have sufficient value to the jury to warrant its admission. In any event, the FBI has stopped performing the procedure, and it appears that in any retrials involving previous testimony, the courts will view the past testimony of FBI examiners more skeptically.</description><subject>Ammunition</subject><subject>Bullets</subject><subject>COMMENTARY</subject><subject>Defendants</subject><subject>Juries</subject><subject>Lead</subject><subject>Legal evidence</subject><subject>Manufacturing processes</subject><subject>Music analysis</subject><subject>Recommendations</subject><subject>Standard deviation</subject><issn>0897-1277</issn><issn>2154-4344</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid/><recordid>eNpjYuA0MjQ10TUxNjFhYeA0sLA01zU0MjfnYOAqLs4yMDCyMDM14WTQDPFwVXAODQpy9QtRCA5xDHFV8HdTcAr18XEN0fVxdXRRcA3zdHH1c3blYWBNS8wpTuWF0twMsm6uIc4eulnFJflF8QVFmbmJRZXxRpbmZkaWZgbGhOQBmzUpEw</recordid><startdate>20061001</startdate><enddate>20061001</enddate><creator>Kaye, D.H.</creator><general>American Bar Association</general><scope/></search><sort><creationdate>20061001</creationdate><title>THE CURRENT STATE OF BULLET-LEAD EVIDENCE</title><author>Kaye, D.H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-jstor_primary_297629603</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Ammunition</topic><topic>Bullets</topic><topic>COMMENTARY</topic><topic>Defendants</topic><topic>Juries</topic><topic>Lead</topic><topic>Legal evidence</topic><topic>Manufacturing processes</topic><topic>Music analysis</topic><topic>Recommendations</topic><topic>Standard deviation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kaye, D.H.</creatorcontrib><jtitle>Jurimetrics (Chicago, Ill.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kaye, D.H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>THE CURRENT STATE OF BULLET-LEAD EVIDENCE</atitle><jtitle>Jurimetrics (Chicago, Ill.)</jtitle><date>2006-10-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>47</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>99</spage><epage>114</epage><pages>99-114</pages><issn>0897-1277</issn><eissn>2154-4344</eissn><abstract>This article describes recent opinions on the admissibility of bullet-lead evidence. In 2004, the National Research Council released a report identifying certain problems with this type of evidence and making recommendations for improvements in the analytical procedure, the interpretation of a match among bullet fragments, and the presentation of the laboratory findings in court. Even if the testimony were as circumspect as called for in the NRC report, however, it might not have sufficient value to the jury to warrant its admission. In any event, the FBI has stopped performing the procedure, and it appears that in any retrials involving previous testimony, the courts will view the past testimony of FBI examiners more skeptically.</abstract><pub>American Bar Association</pub></addata></record>
fulltext	fulltext
identifier	ISSN: 0897-1277
ispartof	Jurimetrics (Chicago, Ill.), 2006-10, Vol.47 (1), p.99-114
issn	0897-1277 2154-4344
language	eng
recordid	cdi_jstor_primary_29762960
source	HeinOnline Law Journal Library; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing
subjects	Ammunition Bullets COMMENTARY Defendants Juries Lead Legal evidence Manufacturing processes Music analysis Recommendations Standard deviation
title	THE CURRENT STATE OF BULLET-LEAD EVIDENCE
url	https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-30T23%3A28%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=THE%20CURRENT%20STATE%20OF%20BULLET-LEAD%20EVIDENCE&rft.jtitle=Jurimetrics%20(Chicago,%20Ill.)&rft.au=Kaye,%20D.H.&rft.date=2006-10-01&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=99&rft.epage=114&rft.pages=99-114&rft.issn=0897-1277&rft.eissn=2154-4344&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cjstor%3E29762960%3C/jstor%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=29762960&rfr_iscdi=true