The importance of distinguishing information from evidence/observations when formulating propositions

The value of forensic results crucially depends on the propositions and the information under which they are evaluated. For example, if a full single DNA profile for a contemporary marker system matching the profile of Mr A is assessed, given the propositions that the DNA came from Mr A and given it came from an unknown person, the strength of evidence can be overwhelming (e.g., in the order of a billion). In contrast, if we assess the same result given that the DNA came from Mr A and given it came from his twin brother (i.e., a person with the same DNA profile), the strength of evidence will be 1, and therefore neutral, unhelpful and irrelevant 1 to the case at hand. While this understanding is probably uncontroversial and obvious to most, if not all practitioners dealing with DNA evidence, the practical precept of not specifying an alternative source with the same characteristics as the one considered under the first proposition may be much less clear in other circumstances. During discussions with colleagues and trainees, cases have come to our attention where forensic scientists have difficulty with the formulation of propositions. It is particularly common to observe that results (e.g., observations) are included in the propositions, whereas-as argued throughout this note-they should not be. A typical example could be a case where a shoe-mark with a logo and the general pattern characteristics of a Nike Air Jordan shoe is found at the scene of a crime. A Nike Air Jordan shoe is then seized at Mr A's house and control prints of this shoe compared to the mark. The results (e.g., a trace with this general pattern and acquired characteristics corresponding to the sole of Mr A's shoe) are then evaluated given the propositions 'The mark was left by Mr A's Nike Air Jordan shoe-sole' and 'The mark was left by an unknown Nike Air Jordan shoe'. As a consequence, the footwear examiner will not evaluate part of the observations (i.e., the mark presents the general pattern of a Nike Air Jordan) whereas they can be highly informative. Such examples can be found in all forensic disciplines. In this article, we present a few such examples and discuss aspects that will help forensic scientists with the formulation of propositions. In particular, we emphasise on the usefulness of notation to distinguish results that forensic scientists should evaluate from case information that the Court will evaluate.

Un "fil rouge" pour prévenir la violence au travail : propositions de mesures prioritaires dans le contexte suisse

Une première étude menée par les auteures de cet article dans le cadre de l'Unité de médecine des violences du Centre hospitalier universitaire vaudois et de l'Institut universitaire romand de santé au travail avait montré que les conséquences à long terme d'une agression physique au travail pouvaient être sérieuses et le soutien de l'employeur était primordial pour surmonter les conséquences d'un tel événement. Une étude complémentaire, dont les résultats sont présentés ici, avait pour but de formuler des propositions concrètes de mesures de prévention de la violence physique au travail dans le contexte suisse. Les résultats sont présentés dans un «fil rouge» qui se présente sous forme de check-lists de recommandations concrètes. Ce travail s'appuie sur l'analyse et la synthèse d'une abondante documentation, ainsi que sur des entretiens auprès de personnes-ressource et des témoignages de victimes d'agressions physiques au travail. En conclusion, il apparaît que les mesures existantes en Suisse sont encore trop souvent partielles et fragmentées, et se limitent souvent à des offres de formation ou d'information ponctuelles. Alors même que les organisations sont de plus en plus confrontées aux agressions envers le personnel, il y a lieu de les sensibiliser à la nécessité d'instaurer de véritables dispositifs de prévention inscrits dans la durée et s'appuyant sur des modèles éprouvés, opérant aux trois niveaux de prévention primaire, secondaire et tertiaire.

A practical guide for the formulation of propositions in the bayesian approach to DNA evidence interpretation in an adversarial environment

The interpretation of complex DNA profiles is facilitated by a Bayesian approach. This approach requires the development of a pair of propositions: one aligned to the prosecution case and one to the defense case. This note explores the issue of proposition setting in an adversarial environment by a series of examples. A set of guidelines generalize how to formulate propositions when there is a single person of interest and when there are multiple individuals of interest. Additional explanations cover how to handle multiple defense propositions, relatives, and the transition from subsource level to activity level propositions. The propositions depend on case information and the allegations of each of the parties. The prosecution proposition is usually known. The authors suggest that a sensible proposition is selected for the defense that is consistent with their stance, if available, and consistent with a realistic defense if their position is not known.

Evaluating forensic biology results given source level propositions

The evaluation of forensic evidence can occur at any level within the hierarchy of propositions depending on the question being asked and the amount and type of information that is taken into account within the evaluation. Commonly DNA evidence is reported given propositions that deal with the sub-source level in the hierarchy, which deals only with the possibility that a nominated individual is a source of DNA in a trace (or contributor to the DNA in the case of a mixed DNA trace). We explore the use of information obtained from examinations, presumptive and discriminating tests for body fluids, DNA concentrations and some case circumstances within a Bayesian network in order to provide assistance to the Courts that have to consider propositions at source level. We use a scenario in which the presence of blood is of interest as an exemplar and consider how DNA profiling results and the potential for laboratory error can be taken into account. We finish with examples of how the results of these reports could be presented in court using either numerical values or verbal descriptions of the results.

Helping formulate propositions in forensic DNA analysis

The Bayesian paradigm is the preferred approach to evidence interpretation. It requires the evaluation of the probability of the evidence under at least two propositions. The value of the findings (i.e., our LR) will depend on these propositions and the case information, so it is crucial to identify which propositions are useful for the case at hand. Previously, a number of principles have been advanced and largely accepted for the evaluation of evidence. In the evaluation of traces involving DNA mixtures there may be more than two propositions possible. We apply these principles to some exemplar situations. We also show that in some cases, when there are no clear propositions or no defendant, a forensic scientist may be able to generate explanations to account for observations. In that case, the scientist plays a role of investigator, rather than evaluator. We believe that it is helpful for the scientist to distinguish those two roles.

Fingermark age determinations: legal considerations, review of the literature and practical propositions

The question of the age of fingermarks is often raised in investigations and trials when suspects admit that they have left their fingermarks at a crime scene but allege that the contact occurred at a different time than the crime and for legal reasons. In the first part of this review article, examples from American appellate court cases will be used to demonstrate that there is a lack of consensus among American courts regarding the admissibility and weight of testimony from expert witnesses who provide opinions about the age of fingermarks. Of course, these issues are not only encountered in America but have also been reported elsewhere, for example in Europe. The disparity in the way fingermark dating cases were managed in these examples is probably due to the fact that no methodology has been validated and accepted by the forensic science community so far. The second part of this review article summarizes the studies reported on fingermark dating in the literature and highlights the fact that most proposed methodologies still suffer from limitations preventing their use in practice. Nevertheless, several approaches based on the evolution of aging parameters detected in fingermark residue over time appear to show promise for the fingermark dating field. Based on these approaches, the definition of a formal methodological framework for fingermark dating cases is proposed in order to produce relevant temporal information. This framework identifies which type of information could and should be obtained about fingermark aging and what developments are still required to scientifically address dating issues.

Influence de la vaccine sur la population, ou De la gastro-entérite varioleuse avant et depuis la vaccine / par M. A. Bayard,.... précédée des rapports / de MM. Roche et Bricheteau ; des observations de M. Ch. Dupin et des propositions de M. H. Carnot...

Comprend : Rapport / de M. Bricheteau ; Rapport / de M. Roche

« Ordre particulier des Élémens de Géométrie qui servent à la pratique des arts, » et autres propositions attribuées à ROBERVAL. (1651).

Contient : « Elementa musicæ » ; « Brieves observations sur la composition des mouvemens et sur le moyen de trouver les touchantes des lignes courbes, » par Roberval