New perspectives in the use of ink evidence in forensic science: Part I. Development of a quality assurance process for forensic ink analysis by HPTLC

The level of information provided by ink evidence to the criminal and civil justice system is limited. The limitations arise from the weakness of the interpretative framework currently used, as proposed in the ASTM 1422-05 and 1789-04 on ink analysis. It is proposed to use the likelihood ratio from the Bayes theorem to interpret ink evidence. Unfortunately, when considering the analytical practices, as defined in the ASTM standards on ink analysis, it appears that current ink analytical practices do not allow for the level of reproducibility and accuracy required by a probabilistic framework. Such framework relies on the evaluation of the statistics of the ink characteristics using an ink reference database and the objective measurement of similarities between ink samples. A complete research programme was designed to (a) develop a standard methodology for analysing ink samples in a more reproducible way, (b) comparing automatically and objectively ink samples and (c) evaluate the proposed methodology in a forensic context. This report focuses on the first of the three stages. A calibration process, based on a standard dye ladder, is proposed to improve the reproducibility of ink analysis by HPTLC, when these inks are analysed at different times and/or by different examiners. The impact of this process on the variability between the repetitive analyses of ink samples in various conditions is studied. The results show significant improvements in the reproducibility of ink analysis compared to traditional calibration methods.

Statistical hypothesis testing and common misinterpretations: should we abandon p-value in forensic science applications?

Many people regard the concept of hypothesis testing as fundamental to inferential statistics. Various schools of thought, in particular frequentist and Bayesian, have promoted radically different solutions for taking a decision about the plausibility of competing hypotheses. Comprehensive philosophical comparisons about their advantages and drawbacks are widely available and continue to span over large debates in the literature. More recently, controversial discussion was initiated by an editorial decision of a scientific journal [1] to refuse any paper submitted for publication containing null hypothesis testing procedures. Since the large majority of papers published in forensic journals propose the evaluation of statistical evidence based on the so called p-values, it is of interest to expose the discussion of this journal's decision within the forensic science community. This paper aims to provide forensic science researchers with a primer on the main concepts and their implications for making informed methodological choices.