Doug:

Leave it up to the government to start something and not finish it.

This whole thing about wording for the level of certainty came from the National Commission on Forensic Science (NCFS or Commission) was created by the U. S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in 2013, as a Federal Advisory Committee to the DOJ. This was part of a memorandum of understanding between DOJ and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). This Commission was disbanded by the DOJ in 2017.

NCFS passed the duty to develop acceptable wording to be used to the Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science (OSAC). OSAC was created by the National Institute for Science and Technology (NIST) and the DOJ in 2014 to address a lack of discipline-specific forensic science standards. OSAC fills this gap by drafting proposed standards and sending them to standards developing organizations (SDOs). So, OSAC does not draft standards but only gives recommendations. In 2020, OSAC updated its structure and improved several processes. These changes will enable OSAC, which is administered by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), to make high-quality, science-based standards available more quickly to forensic laboratories. As of this date, I have not found where OSAC has suggested acceptable wording to any standards developing organizations. What they did do is pass this duty of developing the wording to the Department of Justice. If this is OSAC’s position to pass this duty to the DOJ with the purpose of the DOJ publishing a recommendation for all forensic science disciplines, then OSAC should be sure that the DOJ will be addressing this issue for all. This was not the case when it came to the DOJ.

Starting as far back as 2019, and through September of 2022, the DOJ published “Uniform Language For Testimony And Reports”. They addressed they language for seventeen different disciplines in agencies under their control. The DOJ instructed the disciplines under its supervision to no longer use the phrase “Reasonable Degree of Scientific Certainty” in their reports or testimony.

There was one discipline for which there was no suggestion. This is the one for the fire and explosion investigation discipline. If the DOJ does not consider the fire investigation discipline as one of the disciplines that should be addressed, then there is no action being taken to address this issue as suggested by OSAC, NCFS, NIST or the DOJ and the process has failed to suggest acceptable for the forensic sciences disciplines outside of those controlled by the DOJ.

Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group