I am not arguing that any organization has the right to dictate to their organization the procedures to be used. I am not arguing about their justification, that is their right.

I disagree that the words have no meaning, as I have shown.

Making statements with no supporting documentation is something I thought we want to get away from doing. When it is said it may be misleading, what is that based on. Has there been any scientific testing as to the use of the term? What accepted studies have been done to support this conclusion? Are we making changes just because several people believe it may be misleading without proof that it is misleading.

I see not supporting documentation from the National Commission on Forensic Science that supports the contention of the wording being misleading. How many people are involved in fire investigations? What is the percentage of the total fire investigation is on this committee? At this time this is nothing more than a opinion of several individuals without support.

I agree there is no precise definition for the combination of words, but when you define the words individually there is a definition. A reasonable degree of scientific certainty equivalates to sufficient grounds of explanation based to the extent that this conclusion is reached by using a systemic method that is based on the evidence. A long sentence saying the same thing. I have no problem using this longer sentence if it is believed that it would elevate any confusion.

As to what a lay person will understand during a trial, it is up to the attorney and the witness to educate that person. Is that not what we are doing as experts educating the lay person in areas where he may not have knowledge.

Tell me what is the appropriate wording that is recommended by OSAC and NIST that should be used by the expert. Here OSAC is saying stop using this wording but has not furnished appropriate word. I guess they are saying do not use anything in an explanation.

What is the judge and jury looking for from the expert? It is the “certainty” of that person as to his opinion being correct. So, the key word is not Reasonable, Degree, or Scientific. It is the word Certainty. Reasonable, degree, and scientific are nothing more than descriptive word for the main word certainty. What you are doing is the same. Reasonable, degree and professional are descriptive words for certainty.

Do you have a site that defines Reasonable degree of professional certainty?

I was once asked as to what I meant when I used the term to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty. I had read something that gave me my answer. The answer was, I found clear and convincing evidence for my opinion. The attorney asking the question changed subjects.

Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group