Index

References are by chapter and section number.

"Badly fragmented" (NAS critique) — 6.4
"Candid direct disarms the cross" (Figure 30.1) — 30.3
"Enhancement" (limits of) — 2.2
"Garbage in, garbage out" (sample integrity vs. instrument) — 23.1, 23.5, 23.6
"Is the claim valid?" vs. "Is the witness qualified?" — 17.5, Conclusion
"Strongly supports," not "proves" — 39.4
"Sufficient agreement" standard — 15.4
"To a reasonable degree of scientific certainty" (empty incantation) — 30.4
"Uncertainty is the content of forensic science" — 30.5
"Undetermined" as honest classification — 22.2, 22.4
"Who is this?" — identity as the prior question — 17.1, Case File
"Zero error rate" / "100% certain" — 30.4
"Zero error rate" / "individualization" testimony (indefensible) — 14.6
2004 Indian Ocean tsunami / TTVI operation — case-study-02
2015 FBI microscopic-hair-comparison review — 19.3

A

A Year at the Bench (composite analyst) — case-study-01
AAFS (American Academy of Forensic Sciences) — 40.3
Abandoned DNA — 8.5, 29.5, case-study-02, case-study-01
Absence of injury not exculpatory — 37.4, 37.6
Absence of residue ≠ absence of accelerant — 22.5
Accelerant — 22.5
Accident reconstruction — 36.4, 36.6
Accreditation — 4.2
Accumulated degree days (ADD) — 13.3
Accumulated degree hours (ADH) — 13.3
Accuracy, precision, sensitivity, specificity, robustness — 4.4
ACE-V (Analysis, Comparison, Evaluation, Verification) — 14.4
ACE-V (applied to toolmarks) — 16.4
Acid phosphatase / p30 (PSA) (semen screening) — 10.1
Actuarial vs. unstructured clinical judgment — 28.2
Additions and insertions ("$9,500" → "$95,000") — 18.4
Adjacent paths (law, policy, journalism, reform) — 40.5
Admissibility of evidence — 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.6
Adversarial allegiance — 30.6
Advocate vs. witness — 30.6
Affirmative-evidence standard for incendiary cause — 22.4
AFIS and the database search — 14.5
AFIS candidate list (ranked, not an identification) — 14.5
AFIS candidate list as a primer — 31.4, case-study-01
AFIS priming of the examiner (contextual bias) — 14.5, 14.6
AFTE conclusions: identification / elimination / inconclusive — 15.4
Age estimation (epiphyseal fusion, dental development, pubic symphysis) — 12.3
AI and machine learning in forensics — 29.4
Air-drying biological evidence — 2.4
Albert S. Osborn — 18.6, case-study-01
Alcohol pharmacology (absorption, distribution, elimination) — 20.4
Alec Jeffreys — 7.1
Algor mortis (cooling curve; confounders) — 11.4
allele — 7.2, 7.4
Allele drop-in — 8.2
Allele dropout — 8.2
Allele frequency — 9.1
Allele sharing / stacking — 8.3
Alligatoring / char blisters (debunked) — 22.3
American Board of Criminalistics (ABC) — 40.3
American Board of Forensic Odontology (ABFO) — 40.3
American Board of Medicolegal Death Investigators (ABMDI) — 40.3
American Board of Pathology (forensic pathology) — 40.3
Amylase (saliva screening) — 10.1
ANAB / A2LA / ASCLD-LAB (accrediting bodies) — 4.2
Analytical microscopy — 23.5
analytical threshold — 7.3
Ancestry estimation (controversy) — 12.3
Ancillary studies (radiography / postmortem CT) — 11.2
Angle of impact — 10.4
Animal scavenging (carnivore, rodent damage) — 12.5, 12.6
Antemortem / perimortem / postmortem injury; vital reaction — 11.5
Antemortem records (the known) — 17.2
Antemortem trauma (healed) — 12.4
Anti-contamination discipline (touch DNA) — 8.1
Anti-contamination practices (PPE, single-use tools, separate packaging) — 3.6
Anti-money-laundering (AML) / know-your-customer (KYC) — 27.3
Appeal to sophistication (junk-science move) — 29.6
Appeals test process, not factual innocence — 34.4
Archaeological exhumation of clandestine graves — 35.5
Architectural/tool paint comparison — 24.2
Area of convergence — 10.5
Area of origin — 10.5
Asphyxia (strangulation; petechiae; nonspecific findings) — 11.5
Assault-versus-fall problem (head injury) — 11.5
Asset misappropriation — 27.2
Asset tracing — 27.3
Associative evidence — 3.2
Asymmetric scrutiny (bias in a matrix) — 39.2
Atlanta fiber case (Wayne Williams) — case-study-02
Audit (routine) vs. forensic accounting — 27.1
Audit log (accounting software) — 27.4
Audit trail — 27.4
Automation bias — 29.4
Automotive paint layer system (e-coat/primer/basecoat/clearcoat) — 24.2
Autopsy (forensic vs. clinical) — 11.2
Autopsy may yield "undetermined" cause — 11.2
Autopsy order of operations — 11.2

B

BAC (blood alcohol concentration) — 20.4
Backdated entries / out-of-hours entries — 27.4
Background pollen "rain" / transfer and persistence — 13.5
Backlog (forensic testing) — 4.1, 4.6
Backlog as institutional bias failure — 37.5
Backlog vs. laboratory delay — 37.5
Backlogs in crime laboratories — 40.4
Ballistics (strict vs. courtroom sense) — 15.1
Barnum effect (Forer effect) — 28.5
Base peak — 23.6
bases (A, T, G, C) — 7.2
Bayesian reasoning — 9.5
BCCI money-laundering scandal — case-study-02
Bearing surface (of a bullet) — 15.2
Beatrice Six (false/bias-driven convergence) — case-study-02
Behavioral linkage analysis — 28.3, 28.6
Beltway sniper firearms linkage — case-study-01
Benford as a screening tool (vs. proof) — 27.5
Benford first-digit bar chart (Figure 27.1) — 27.5
Benford's law — 27.5
Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme — case-study-01
Best-practice lineup sequence (six safeguards) — 32.4
Bias amplifiers in the Lindbergh examination — 18.6, case-study-01
Bias blind spot — 31.1, 31.6
Bias cascade — 6.3, 31.3, 31.4
Bias cascade from the interrogation room — 33.5
Bias cascade in the Mayfield error — 14.6, case-study-01
Bias in DNA mixture interpretation — 31.4, 31.5, case-study-02
Bias laundering / training-data bias in AI — 29.4
Bidirectional transfer (scene ↔ perpetrator) — 3.1
Biological profile — 12.3
Biomarkers (oil-spill fingerprinting) — 36.2
Bite-mark analysis (debunked) — 16.5, 16.6
Bite-mark comparison (discredited) — 6.5, 6.6
Bite-mark comparison (discredited; owned Ch.16) — 17.5
Black-box / source-code controversy — 9.3
Black-box problem (unauditable algorithmic reasoning) — 29.4
Black-box study — 6.5
Blind analysis — 31.5
Blind re-analysis as the most valuable further test — 39.5
Blind verification — 14.4
Blind, context-managed analysis as the key forensic reform — 34.5
Blinded (folder/computer) administration alternative — 32.4
Blood as a toxicology specimen — 20.2, 20.6
Bloodstain collection (wet-then-dry swab) — 10.3
Bloodstain pattern analysis (BPA) — 10.4, 10.5, 10.6
Blow flies (Calliphoridae) — 13.1, 13.2, 13.3
Blunt-force injuries (abrasion, contusion, laceration, fracture) — 11.5
Blunt-force skull fracture (focal, radiating, beveling) — 12.6
Board certification (what it does/does not attest) — 40.3
Body fluid identification — 10.1
Body movement inferred from out-of-habitat fauna — 13.4
Bone histology (species determination) — 12.2
Booking-station DNA / CODIS reference search — 29.1
Boston Marathon bombing (probative video + crowdsourced misidentification) — case-study-01
Botanical association of a vehicle with a place — 13.6
BPA validity and disputes — 10.6
Brandon Mayfield (second-sin anchor; near-miss) — 34.3
Brandon Mayfield / Madrid bombing latent — 14.6, case-study-01
Brandon Mayfield case (the bias cascade in the real world) — 31.4, case-study-01
Breaks in the chain of custody — 2.5, 2.7
Breathable packaging (paper, not plastic) — 10.3
Breech-face marks — 15.3
Brendan Dassey (recorded interrogation; voluntariness split) — case-study-02
Bruise aging / dating unreliability — 37.4
Bruno Richard Hauptmann (State v. Hauptmann) — 18.6, case-study-01
BTK / Dennis Rader (metadata on a floppy disk) — case-study-01
Buccal (cheek) swab as reference sample — 29.1
Bundy / Chi Omega bite-mark testimony (two faces) — case-study-02
Burial effects (soil pressure) — 12.5

C

Cameron Todd Willingham (burn-pattern folklore vs. chemical confirmation) — 21.5
Cameron Todd Willingham (first-sin anchor) — 34.3
Cameron Todd Willingham case (anchor) — 22.6, case-study-01
Candidate-pool size and discriminating power — 17.4
capillary electrophoresis — 7.3
Carboxyhemoglobin (carbon monoxide) — 11.6
Careers reflection on the cold-case roles — Case File
Carryover / cross-contamination — 4.5
Cartridge case — 15.3
Case manager / context manager (evidence gatekeeper) — 31.5
Case triage and assignment — 4.1
Casey Anthony case (entomology + CSI effect) — case-study-01
Casing-distribution reconstruction (where the shooter stood) — 15.3
Cast (dental stone; snow-print wax) — 16.2, 16.3
Cast-off and expirated patterns — 10.4
Casting tire impressions in sections — 16.3
Cause arcing vs. victim arcing — 36.5
Cause classifications (accidental, natural, incendiary, undetermined) — 22.2
Cause of death — 11.3
Cause vs. manner vs. mechanism — 11.3
Cell-site as alibi-breaking (consistent with / inconsistent with) — 25.5
Cell-site/location data — 25.5
Central Park Five / Exonerated Five (five coerced-compliant confessions; Matias Reyes DNA) — case-study-01
Chain of custody — 2.5
Chain of custody (documentary integrity) — 3.6
Chain of custody for digital evidence — 25.1, 25.2
Chain of custody of a sexual-assault kit — 37.3
Chamber marks — 15.3
Charred partnership document / altered beneficiary (Figure 27.3) — 27.6
Cheapfake — 26.5
Chemical fingerprinting (source attribution) — 36.2
Chemiluminescence — 10.2
Chemistry section / drug-chemistry unit (lab workflow) — 21.1
Chromatogram, reading a — 23.2, 23.6
Chromatography — 23.2
chromosomes — 7.2
CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species) — 36.1
class characteristic — 1.3
Class characteristics (firearms) — 15.2, 15.3, 15.6
Class vs. individual across new domains — 36.6
Class vs. individual characteristics (applied to impressions) — 16.1, 16.2, 16.3, 16.4
Class vs. individual characteristics (applied to physical evidence) — 3.2
Class vs. individual toolmark testimony (PCAST 2016) — 16.4
Class vs. individual toolmarks (residual uncertainty) — 39.5
Class/association evidence places, it does not prove — 39.5
close relatives (and RMP) — 7.5
Code of ethics — 38.1
Code of ethics as external accountability standard (cross-examination) — 38.1
CODIS (Combined DNA Index System) — 7.4
CODIS hit as investigative lead — 37.3, 37.5
Cody Renner (cold case false confession) — Case File
Coerced-compliant confession — 33.3
Coerced-internalized confession — 33.3
Coerced-internalized false confession (non-independence) — case-study-02
Cognitive bias — 31.1, 31.2, 31.3, 31.4, 31.5, 31.6
Cognitive bias in fingerprint comparison (three entry points) — 14.4, 14.6
Cold Case (Mill Creek / Marcus Diallo) — 1.7
Cold case: charred insurance/partnership document; indicated altered beneficiary; indented writing — 18.5, Case File
Cold case: Cody Renner exonerated by the science (near-miss) — 34, Case File
Cold case: Dana Whitfield DV report reviewed; Dana excluded — 37.5 (Case File)
Cold case: dead before the fire; manner amended to homicide — 11.6, Case File
Cold case: dental records confirm the body is Marcus Diallo — 17.4, Case File
Cold case: Diallo's and Keller's phones; deleted messages; cell-site finding — 25.3, 25.4, 25.5, Case File
Cold case: electrical system ruled out as accidental cause — 36.5, Case File
Cold case: fire debris — confirmation pending) — 21.5, Case File, accelerant indicated (gasoline
Cold case: gas-can latent "inconclusive" as bias-resistant — 31.5, Case File
Cold case: gas-station CCTV, doorbell camera, alibi-video metadata — 26.1, 26.6, Case File
Cold case: GC-MS confirms gasoline in fire debris — 23.6, Case File
Cold case: glass item; negative GSR — Case File
Cold case: incendiary on valid grounds (multiple origins + gasoline pattern) — 22.6, Case File
Cold case: insurance policies, debts, Benford-flagged renovation books — 27.6, Case File
Cold case: mixture LR for Roy Keller — 9 (Case File)
Cold case: no bite marks (debunked method taught by absence) — 16.5, Case File
Cold case: partial latent on the gas can; AFIS; inconclusive — 14.6, Case File
Cold case: pollen on the vehicle floor mat — 13.6, Case File
Cold case: presenting the mixture LR and arson finding honestly — 30.6, Case File
Cold case: pry marks → forced entry (class match to a pry bar) — 16.4, Case File
Cold case: re-reading the "accidental fire" frame as bias — 31.5, Case File
Cold case: Renner's interrogation dissected; contradicted by autopsy timeline + cell-site — 33.5, Case File
Cold case: rootless head hair → mtDNA — 19.6, Case File
Cold case: sedative at an incapacitating level; modest BAC — 20.5, 20.6, Case File
Cold case: SEM-EDX particle on a sleeve (consistent-with) — 23.5, Case File
Cold case: shoe impression in soil (class evidence) — 16.2, Case File
Cold case: single-victim vs. mass-fatality identification (teaching aside) — Case File
Cold case: small lab's lack of independence; process critique — 38.6, Case File
Cold case: soil on Roy Keller's boots — 24.4, Case File
Cold case: stranger theory excluded (gas-can minor contributor) — 29.5, Case File
Cold case: synthetic fibers on the victim's shirt — 19.6, Case File
Cold case: the "lone drifter/stranger" profile — 28.4, Case File
Cold case: the capstone assembly and conclusion — 39.1–39.6, Case File
Cold case: the neighbor's "tall stranger's truck" (eyewitness lead discounted) — Case File
Cold case: the stray cartridge case (NIBIN; red herring vs. no gunshot wound) — 15.1, Case File
Cold-hit / database-search statistics — 9.5
Colin Pitchfork case — 7.1, case-study-01
Collection of evidence — 2.4
Color-test reagents (Marquis, cobalt thiocyanate / Scott, Duquenois-Levine, Mecke, Mandelin) — 21.2
Column (capillary) — 23.2
Combined drug toxicity (synergy) — 20.5
Combined Probability of Inclusion (CPI / RMNE) — 8.3
Combustion — 22.1
Commercial extraction tools (black-box problem) — 25.4
Commingled remains; re-association — 35.1, 35.3, 35.5
Common scene errors — 2.7
Communicating uncertainty — 30.5
Communicating uncertainty (honest script) — 9.6
Comparison microscope — 19.5
Comparison microscope (firearms) — 15.4
Comparison microscope (toolmark comparison) — 16.4
Comparison microscope as bias amplifier (confirmation) — 19.5
comparison, logic of — 1.3
Comparison/control sample (fire debris) — 22.5
Competency to stand trial — 28.2
Competing hypotheses (Hp and Hd) — 9.2, 9.4
Complications: burial, concealment, indoor scenes — 13.4
Complications: fire and the entomological estimate — 13.4
Complications: season and geography — 13.4
Compression and format forensics (JPEG, doubly-compressed regions) — 26.4
Compromised scene (residual uncertainty) — 39.5
Conclusion categories: identification / possible / insufficient / exclusion — 17.3
Conclusion scales (identification → inconclusive → elimination) — 18.3
Conditional evidence — 3.2
Confession as the "gold standard" (junk-science inversion) — 33.4
Confession contamination — 33.5
Confidence–accuracy relationship — 32.5
Confirm-before-conviction principle — 21.6
Confirmation bias — 31.2
Confirmation, hindsight bias, tunnel vision in profiling — 28.5
Confirmatory result, properties of (specificity; two orthogonal dimensions; standard + blank) — 23.1
Confirmatory test — 10.1, 10.2
Conflict of interest — 38.5
Conformance vs. validity (accreditation limit) — 4.2, 4.4
Confounders of the early postmortem clocks — 11.4
Confrontation and refusal of denials — 33.2
Consent at a distance — 8.6
Consent at a distance (genetic genealogy ethics) — 29.5, case-study-01
Consulting forensic specialists (anthropology, odontology, entomology) — 40.1, 40.2
Contact DNA (see Touch DNA) — 8.1
Contaminant age-dating / release timing — 36.2
Contamination (routes and controls) — 4.5
Contamination and control samples in explosives work — 21.4
Contamination of evidence — 3.6
Contamination of trace evidence (lab-manufactured "match") — 19.1
Contemporaneous notes — 2.2
Content-provenance standards / authentication-at-capture (C2PA) — 26.6
Context management — 31.5
Context management in lab workflow — 4.1, 4.5
Contextual bias — 31.2, 31.3
Contextual bias in handwriting comparison — 18.3
Contextual bias in trauma interpretation — 12.4, 12.6
Continuing competency — 40.3
Contributing causes of wrongful conviction — 6.3
Contributing factors to wrongful conviction — 34.1, 34.2
Control sample — 3.3
Control weaknesses — 27.2
Controlled-substance analysis — 21.2
Convergence across independent identifiers — 35.4
Convergence across primary identifiers — 17.4
Convergence of evidence — 39.3
Convergence of evidence (motive + opportunity + means) — 27.6
Conviction integrity unit (CIU) — 34.5
Conviction integrity units (career angle) — 40.5
Conviction integrity units and reform — 34.5
Core and delta — 14.2
Coroner system — 11.1
Coroner-system failure / missed homicide (composite) — case-study-02
Corroborated detail / "guilty knowledge" — 33.5
Corroboration vs. independence ("two pillars, one source") — 34.2
Corruption (bribery, kickbacks) — 27.2
Cotton/Thompson case (confident misidentification, DNA exoneration) — 32.6, case-study-01
Court limits on firearms testimony (Glynn; "to the exclusion of all other firearms") — 15.6, case-study-02
Craig Beyler report / Texas Forensic Science Commission — 22.6, case-study-01
Crazed glass (debunked) — 22.3, case-study-01
Credential halo effect / complacency (bias) — 40.3
Cressey and the fraud triangle — 27.2
Crime laboratory (sections, workflow) — 4.1
Crime scene (definition) — 2.1
Crime-scene investigator (sworn vs. civilian) — 40.1, 40.4
Crime-scene log (entry/exit log) — 2.1, 2.7
Crime-scene photography (overall/mid-range/close-up; scale) — 2.2
Crime-scene sketch (triangulation/baseline) — 2.2
Criminal profiling — 28.1, 28.3, 28.4
criminalistics — 1.1
Cross-contamination — 2.4, 2.7
Cross-examination — 30.3
Cross-examination questions on bias and blinding — 31.4, 31.6
Cross-examination seams: assumptions and inputs — 30.3
Cross-examination seams: bias and what you were told — 30.3
Cross-examination seams: case-specific application (reliable-application prong) — 30.3
Cross-examination seams: certainty — 30.3
Cross-examination seams: contamination and chain of custody — 30.3
Cross-examination seams: error rate and the literature — 30.3
Cross-race effect (own-race bias) — 32.2, 32.6
Cross-reactivity (false positives) — 20.3
Cross-scene / cross-jurisdiction linkage — 15.5, case-study-01
Crush damage and impact-speed estimation — 36.4
CSI effect — 1.2
Current status of bite-mark testimony (excluded/restricted) — 16.5
Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) kit initiative — 37.5, case-study-01
Cyanoacrylate (superglue) fuming — 14.3

D

database search effect — 7.4
Database terms of service (law enforcement) — 8.6
Daubert challenges to handwriting testimony; the "middle path" — 18.3
Daubert factors (the four) — 5.4
Daubert standard — 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6
Daubert trilogy (Daubert/Joiner/Kumho Tire) — 5.5
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals — 5.3, 5.4
David Camm case — 10.6
Death certificate cause-of-death sequence — 11.3
Death-investigation system as ceiling on the science — 11.1
Debunked fire indicators — 22.3
Decomposition (autolysis, putrefaction) — 11.4
Decomposition / succession reference studies (pig analogs) — 13.2
Deconvolution — 8.3
Deepfake — 26.5
Deepfake detection (artifacts, ML classifiers) and its limits — 26.5
Defense fallacy — 9.4
Defense fallacy used on cross — 30.3
Degradation (DNA) — 8.2
Degradation of evidence — 3.6
Deleted files (deletion delists, only overwriting destroys) — 25.3
Demonstration vs. validation — 29.6
Dental charting — 17.3
Dental identification — 17.1, 17.2, 17.3, 17.4
Dental identification under disaster conditions — 35.3
Dental work performed after the last record (stale records) — 17.2
Dentin and cementum — 17.1
Department of Justice disagreement with PCAST — 38.3, 38.5, case-study-01
Detection of fraud by tips — 27.2
Detroit ~11,000 untested kits — 37.5, case-study-01
Development chemistry (porous vs. nonporous; residue) — 14.3
Developmental threshold (insect) — 13.3
Developmental vs. internal validation — 4.4
Device activity vs. owner activity — 25.4
Digital crime scene (device as physical evidence) — 25.1
Digital evidence — 25.1
Digital forensic examiner (career) — 40.1
Digital forensics — 25.1, 25.2, 25.3, 25.4
Digital privacy ("the privacies of life") — 25.6
Digital records and metadata — 27.4
Direct examination — 30.2
Direct vs. kinship DNA matching — 35.3
Directionality of a stain — 10.4
Disaster victim identification (DVI) — 35.1, 35.2, 35.3, 35.4
Disaster victim identification (DVI) (preview Ch.35) — 17.4
Disguise and change of appearance — 32.2
Dispositional risk factors (youth, intellectual disability, mental illness) — 33.4
Distance (and limits of facial resolution) — 32.2
Distant-relative match — 8.5
Distinctiveness of a pollen assemblage (rare/localized species) — 13.5, 13.6
DNA analysis (forensic) — 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6
DNA analyst (career) — 40.1, 40.2
DNA as a retroactive audit of past convictions — 34.1
DNA barcoding (species ID) — 36.1
DNA exonerations — 6.2, 6.3
DNA exonerations as the reckoning over hair — 19.3
DNA extraction — 7.3
DNA match vs. exclusion — 7.4, 7.6
DNA mixture — 8.3
DNA mixture (preview) — 7.3, Case File
DNA mixture interpretation — 9.3
DNA mixture vs. single-source match (residual uncertainty) — 39.5
DNA mixtures (in bloodstains) — 10.3
DNA profile — 7.4
DNA quantification — 7.3
DNA re-association of commingled remains — 35.3, 35.5
DNA silent on consent (identification vs. crime) — 37.3
DNA under disaster conditions (degraded, low-template) — 35.3
DNA, biology of — 7.2
Document-before-you-disturb rule — 2.2, 2.7
Documentation (notes, photography, sketch) — 2.2
Documentation before comparison (time-stamped Stage-1 record) — 31.5
Documenting and recovering footwear impressions (photograph, lift, cast) — 16.2
Does profiling work? (the evidence) — 28.4
DOJ interim policy on forensic genetic genealogy — 29.5, case-study-01
Domain-irrelevant information — 31.2, 31.3, 31.5
Domain-relevant (task-relevant) information — 31.3, 31.5
Double-blind administration — 32.4
Drug instability after death — 20.6
Drug mixtures and adulteration (effect on screening) — 21.2
Dry-labbing — 4.6
Dry-not-wet packaging (DNA integrity) — 37.3
Durability and redundancy of financial records — 27.4
Dusky v. United States (competency standard) — 28.2
Duty to the court vs. duty to the client — 30.6

E

Earl Washington Jr. (multi-factor capital exoneration) — case-study-02
Education for forensic careers (underlying science first) — 40.2
Education → certification ladder — 40.2
Electrical system ruled out as accidental fire cause — 36.5, Case File
Electron ionization — 23.3
electropherogram — 7.3
Electrostatic dust-print lifting / gelatin lifter — 16.2
Elemental composition as class evidence — 23.5
Elimination database (staff profiles) — 8.1
Elimination sample — 3.3
Embedded (dependent) crime laboratory — 38.2
Emerging forensic technologies (evaluating before trusting) — 29.1, 29.6
Enamel (durability; hardest tissue) — 17.1
Encoding / storage / retrieval (three-stage model) — 32.1
Encryption (permission vs. capability) — 25.6
Energy-dispersive X-ray analysis (EDX/EDS) — 23.5
Enhancement (limits) — 26.3
Entomotoxicology (drugs/toxins in larvae) — 13.4
Environmental forensics — 36.2, 36.6
Environmental weathering of bone — 12.5
Erasures (mechanical and chemical) — 18.4
Error level analysis (ELA) and its limits — 26.4
Error rate (as a reliability factor) — 5.4, 5.6
error rate, as a virtue — 1.5
Escalating confidence ("100 percent," "incontrovertible") — 31.4, case-study-01
ESDA (electrostatic detection apparatus) — 18.5
Estimator variables — 32.2
Evaluating tomorrow's methods (the §29.6 checklist) — 29.6
Evaluation outcomes (identification, exclusion, inconclusive) — 14.4
Event data recorder (EDR) — 36.4
Every contact leaves a trace — 3.1
Evidence from the living — 37.2
Evidence intake and receiving — 4.1
Evidence integrity — 3.6
Evidence log (assembly tool) — 39.1
Evidence-survival problem (lost/destroyed biology) — 34.4
Evidentiary asymmetry (include vs. exclude) applied to eyewitness ID — 32.6
Examination-quality photography (scale, oblique light) — 16.2, 16.3
Examiner's question cluster (authorship, authenticity, alteration, sequence, hidden writing, source) — 18.1
Exclusion (as the power behind exonerations) — 6.2
Exclusion as forensic science's surest move — 39.2
Exclusion as the cleaner result — 17.3
Exclusion as the cleanest class-evidence result — 24.5
Exclusion as the logic of exoneration — 34.1, 34.6
Exclusion ignored as a failure mode — 16.6
Exclusion matrix — 39.2
exclusion vs. proof — 1.6
Exemplar (collected vs. requested) — 18.2
EXIF data (photo timestamp and GPS) — 25.3, 25.4
Exoneration — 6.1, 6.2
Exoneree — 34.1
Expert testimony on false confessions — 33.6
Expert witness — 30.1
Explainable vs. unexplainable discrepancy (direction rule) — 17.2, 17.3
Explosion reconstruction (fuel-air vs. condensed-phase) — 36.5
Explosives analysis — 21.4
Explosives residue (post-blast) — 21.4
Exposure duration (and overestimation of event length) — 32.2
External (exterior) ballistics — 15.1
External examination (trace collected before washing) — 11.2
Extraction blank / reagent blank — 4.5
Extractor and ejector marks — 15.3
Eyewitness identification — 32.1, 32.2, 32.3, 32.5, 32.6
Eyewitness reforms (2014 NAS report) — 32.6

F

Fabricated-frequency problem — 24.5, 24.6
Facial comparison (examiner opinion) vs. automated facial recognition — 26.2
Facial recognition (forensic use and demographic bias) — 29.4
Failure analysis — 36.3, 36.6
Failure-analysis fault tree — 36.3
False (bias-driven) convergence — 39.3, 39.5
False confession — 33.1, 33.2, 33.3, 33.4, 33.5, 33.6
False confession (as a factor) — 34.2
False confession (as cause) — 6.3
False positives (blood presumptive tests) — 10.2
False-evidence ploy — 33.4
Falsifiability / testability — 5.4
Falsifiability of a forensic conclusion — 39.5
Falsifiability vs. unfalsifiable statements — 28.5
Familial searching (CODIS partial match / kinship) — 29.5, case-study-02
Familial searching vs. IGG (markers, database, relatedness) — 29.5, case-study-02
Families; forensics as a humanitarian act — 35.6
Family liaison; DNA reference collection from relatives — 35.6
Family-tree reconstruction — 8.5
Fatigue and progression ("beach") marks — 36.3
FBI Behavioral Science / Analysis Unit — 28.3
FBI discontinuation of routine GSR exams (2006) — 24.1, case-study-02
FBI Laboratory / 1997 OIG report (sound method, flawed practice) — case-study-02
FBI/Noblis examiner-error study (false positive / false negative rates) — 14.4
Federal Rules of Evidence — 5.3
Feedback loop into the investigation — 31.3, 31.6
FEPAC accreditation of degree programs — 40.2
Fiber (natural vs. manufactured/synthetic) — 19.4
Fiber examination toolkit (PLM, microspectrophotometry, FTIR) — 19.4
Field test as valid screen vs. invalid identification — 21.6
Field/presumptive accelerant indication (odor, hydrocarbon sniffer, accelerant-detection canine) — 21.5
File carving (headers/footers in raw space) — 25.3
Finality over accuracy — 34.4
Financial evidence as motive — 27.6
Financial-statement fraud — 27.2
Fingerprint analysis (latent print comparison) — 14.1, 14.2, 14.3, 14.4, 14.5, 14.6
Fingerprints under disaster conditions — 35.3
Fingerprints-versus-DNA processing tension (order of operations) — 14.3
Fire deaths: alive or dead before the fire — 11.6
Fire dynamics — 22.1
Fire investigation — 22.1, 22.2, 22.6
Fire investigation on the validity spectrum (spans it) — 22.4, 22.6
Fire triangle (fuel, oxidizer, heat) — 22.1
Fire-and-explosion engineering (callback Ch.22) — 36.5
Fire-death identification — 17.4
Fire-debris chemistry — 21.5
Fire-debris collection (clean metal can / nylon bag; control sample; background pyrolysis products) — 21.5
Fire-debris collection (vapor-tight container, metal can) — 22.5
Firearms identification as a special case of toolmark identification — 16.4
Firing-pin impression — 15.3
First response (priority list) — 2.1
First sin: methods never valid (bite marks, hair, arson folklore) — 34.3
First-digit distribution — 27.5
First-two-digits Benford test — 27.5
Five core principles of forensic codes (objectivity, competence, honest representation, disclosure, service to the court) — 38.1
Flashover — 22.1, 22.4
Flashover (and the "arson indicators") — 5.6
Flawed or misapplied forensic science (as a factor) — 34.2, 34.3
Float glass production and the narrow RI band — 24.3
Floor vs. true rate of false confessions among DNA exonerations — 33.1
Fluorescent dyes and alternate light source — 14.3
Footwear acquired (individual) characteristics — 16.2
Footwear class characteristics (tread design, size, wear) — 16.2
Footwear databases (make/model from outsole) — 16.2
Footwear impression — 16.2
Forensic accounting — 27.1, 27.6
Forensic anthropologist vs. pathologist (division of labor) — 12.1
Forensic anthropology — 12.1
Forensic anthropology in human-rights / mass-fatality work — 12.1, 12.5
Forensic botany — 13.5, 13.6
Forensic career paths — 40.1, 40.2, 40.3
Forensic case assembly — 39.1
Forensic chemist / drug analyst (career) — 40.1
Forensic chemistry — 21.1
Forensic document examiner (FDE) — 18.1
Forensic engineering — 36.3, 36.5, 36.6
Forensic entomology — 13.1, 13.2, 13.3, 13.4
Forensic ethics — 38.1
Forensic imaging (bit-for-bit copy) — 25.2
Forensic isotope analysis — 29.3
Forensic laboratory analyst (bench disciplines) — 40.1
Forensic laboratory sections (DNA, drug chemistry, toxicology, trace, latent prints, firearms, documents, digital) — 4.1
Forensic literacy beyond the lab — case-study-02
Forensic nursing — 37.1, 37.2
Forensic odontology — 17.1, 17.2, 17.3, 17.4, 17.5
Forensic pathologist (career; physician path) — 40.1, 40.2
Forensic pathologist (qualifications) — 11.1
Forensic pathology — 11.1, 11.2, 11.3
Forensic policy (NAS, PCAST, OSAC, legislators) — 40.5
Forensic psychology — 28.1, 28.2, 28.6
Forensic psychology vs. the TV profiler — 28.1
Forensic science's specific role in wrongful conviction — 34.3
forensic science, definition — 1.1
Forensic testimony as half the job — 40.4
Forensic toxicologist (career) — 40.1
Forensic toxicology — 20.1, 20.2, 20.3, 20.4, 20.5, 20.6
Forensically literate lawyer and judge — 40.5
Forgery and alterations (document as physical object) — 18.4
Forgery categories (traced, simulated/freehand, disguised, spurious/blind) — 18.2
forum (Latin root) — 1.1
foundational validity — 1.5
Foundational validity — 6.5, 6.6
Foundational validity (firearms) — 15.6
Foundational validity (PCAST) — 4.4
four learning paths — 1.7
four themes — 1.7
Fracture surfaces (ductile, brittle, fatigue) — 36.3
Fragmentation pattern — 23.3, 23.6
Fragmented / non-chronological traumatic memory — 37.6
Frame averaging / integration (static scenes only) — 26.3
Fraud examination — 27.1
Fraud triangle (pressure, opportunity, rationalization) — 27.2
Fraud vs. invalid method — 4.4, 4.6
Frazier v. Cupp (police deception permitted) — 33.2, 33.4
FRE 702 — 5.3, 5.4
Freeze response (tonic immobility) — 37.6
Fresh vs. dry bone fracture behavior — 12.4
Friability of burned teeth (careful recovery) — 17.1, 17.4
Friction ridge formation (fetal development) — 14.1
Friction ridge skin (structure, persistence) — 14.1
Frye standard ("general acceptance") — 5.2, 5.4
Frye v. United States — 5.2
FTIR (Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy) — 23.4
Fundamental attribution error (juror bias about confessions) — 33.1
Further testing (strengthen or break the conclusion) — 39.5

G

Galton points (historical term for minutiae) — 14.2
Gas chromatography (GC) — 23.2
Gatekeeper (judge's role) — 5.1, 5.3, 5.4, 5.6
GC-MS — 23.3, 23.6
GC-MS confirmation (previewed) — 20.3
GEDmatch — 8.5
GEDmatch / SNP genealogy database — 29.5, case-study-01
Genealogy database (consumer) — 8.5, 8.6
General acceptance (as a factor) — 5.2, 5.4
Genetic privacy — 8.6
Genetic surveillance / equity of database reach — 29.5, case-study-02, case-study-01
Geographic origin determination (wildlife DNA) — 36.1
Geographic profiling — 28.6
Geographic provenancing of human tissues — 29.3
George Floyd / competing autopsies (manner; cause-vs-contributing-condition) — case-study-01
Georgi Markov / ricin pellet (poisoning detection) — case-study-01
Gerald Hurst report (Willingham) — 22.6, case-study-01
Gisli Gudjonsson / interrogative suggestibility — 33.3, 33.4
Glass density and elemental comparison — 24.3
Glass fracture analysis (radial vs. concentric cracks) — 24.3
Glass fracture edge stress marks (direction of force) — 24.3
Golden State Killer — 8.5
Golden State Killer (case study) — 1.6
Golden State Killer (convergence done right) — case-study-01
Golden State Killer (preview) — 7.4
Golden State Killer / Joseph James DeAngelo (IGG anchor, advanced) — case-study-01
Goodness-of-fit testing — 27.5
GPS-derived location log (phone, to meters) — 25.4
Grandfather problem (long-admitted methods) — 5.6
Graphology (pseudoscience, distinguished) — 18.1, 18.3
Grim Sleeper / Lonnie David Franklin Jr. (familial search) — case-study-02
GSR contamination and transfer problem — 24.1
GSR contamination reckoning — case-study-02
GSR loss over time (negative result weak) — 24.1
GSR occupational/environmental background — 24.1
GSR police-transport/booking-area contamination — 24.1
Guildford Four / Birmingham Six (impetus for PEACE) — 33.6
Gunshot residue (GSR) — 24.1, 24.5, 24.6
Gunshot residue (GSR) by SEM-EDX (lead/barium/antimony) — 23.5
Gunshot wounds (range: soot/stippling; entrance vs. exit) — 11.5

H

Hair analysis (and external contamination) — 20.2
Hair as class characteristic; no validated frequency — 19.2, 19.3
Hair morphology (cuticle, cortex, medulla) — 19.2
Hair triage for DNA (rooted vs. rootless) — 19.2, Case File
Hair: body region and treatment — 19.2
Hair: human vs. animal — 19.2
Han Tak Lee case — 22.6, case-study-02
Handwriting comparison — 18.2, 18.3
Harry Markopolos / quantitative red flags — case-study-01
Hash value / cryptographic hash (SHA-256, MD5) — 25.2
Hash verification of an image — 25.2
Headspace extraction (preview of GC-MS, Ch.23) — 22.5
Heat effects on bone (charring, calcination, shrinkage, warping) — 12.6
Heat release rate — 22.1
Heat transfer (conduction, convection, radiation) — 22.1
Heat-induced fracturing vs. blunt-force trauma — 12.6
Height estimate as a range; exclusion vs. consistent-with — 26.2
Hemastix — 10.2
Heme / peroxidase activity — 10.2
Hierarchy of conclusions (exclusion → class → individual → inconclusive) — 16.1
High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) — 23.2
Hired-gun problem — 30.6
Histology (vital reaction) — 11.2
Historical cell-site overstatement (junk-science alert) — 25.5
homozygous / heterozygous — 7.2, 7.3
Honest grading of reform implementation — 38.3
Honest reporting: finding-then-limit grammar — 24.6
honest verbs (exclude / consistent with / strongly supports) — 1.4, 1.6
Houston Forensic Science Center (independent lab) — case-study-02
Houston Police Department Crime Laboratory scandal — case-study-02
Human vs. non-human bone determination — 12.2
Humanitarian vs. judicial goals (tension) — 35.5
Hyatt Regency walkway collapse (1981; NBS/NIST) — case-study-02
Hypervariable region (mtDNA) — 8.4

I

Identification as a humanitarian act — 17.4
Identification Board — 35.2, 35.4
Identification of a substance (analytical) — 20.1, 20.3
Ignitable-liquid residue (ILR) — 22.5
Ignitable-liquid residue (previewed; owned by Ch.22) — 21.5
Image authentication — 26.4
Image forensics — 26.1, 26.2, 26.3, 26.4
Immunoassay — 20.3
Impressed (compression) marks — 16.4
Impression evidence (logic and physics) — 16.1
In-house training and competency testing (rung 3) — 40.2
Incapacitation as a toxic-range (state) inference — 20.5, Case File
Incendiary fire (arson) — 22.2, 22.6
Incentivized informants / jailhouse snitches — 34.2
Inconclusive result (mixtures) — 8.3
Indented writing — 18.5
Independence of evidentiary threads — 39.3
Independence problem (labs inside law enforcement) — 4.7
Independent autopsy — case-study-02, case-study-01
Independent improbabilities multiply (illustrative) — 39.3
Independent laboratory model (NAS recommendation) — 38.2
Indicator vs. finding — 27.4, 27.5
individual characteristic — 1.3
Individual characteristics (firearms) — 15.2
Individual dental history — 17.1
individualization — 1.4
Individualization as overstatement — 30.4
Informed, revocable consent (living victim) — 37.2
Infrared (IR) and infrared-luminescence imaging — 18.4
inhibitors (PCR) — 7.3
Initial walkthrough — 2.2
Injury and the mental state of consent (neither presence nor absence resolves it) — 37.4
Ink aging by chemistry (destructive, contested) — 18.4
Ink dating by first appearance (no-earlier-than boundary) — 18.4
Innocence Project — 6.2
Innocence Project / Innocence Network — 40.5, case-study-02
Insanity defense / criminal responsibility — 28.2
Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 — 28.2
Insect succession on remains — 13.2
Instrument blank — 23.1, 23.6
Instrumental analysis (confirmatory) — 23.1, 23.6
Integration (laundering stage) — 27.3
Integrity vs. authenticity vs. truth — 25.2
Internal (interior) ballistics — 15.1
Internal examination; wound tracks — 11.2
Interpol DVI phases (five-phase framework) — 35.2
Interpretation of effect (the hard question) — 20.1, 20.5, 20.6
Interrogation length ("resistance is finite") — 33.4
Interrogation vs. interview — 33.2
Investigative genetic genealogy (advanced; mechanics and ethics) — 29.5, case-study-01
Investigative genetic genealogy (IGG) — 8.5
Investigative genetic genealogy as a lead vs. confirmation — case-study-01
Investigative interviewing / psychology of memory — 28.6
Investigative journalism and forensic failure — 40.5
Investigative lead vs. courtroom identification — 29.4, 29.5, 29.6
Ipse dixit ("he himself said it") — 30.1
ISO/IEC 17025 — 4.2
Itiel Dror experiments (contextual bias, controlled) — 31.4, case-study-02

J

Jared Lee Loughner / competency to stand trial — case-study-02
John Hinckley Jr. insanity acquittal — 28.2
Joiner (General Electric Co. v. Joiner) — 5.5
Joseph James DeAngelo — 8.5
Joyce Gilchrist (overstatement + the hired gun) — case-study-02
Junk science — 6.1, 6.3, 6.6
Junk science admitted in court — 5.2, 5.6
Jury instructions and eyewitness expert testimony — 32.2, 32.6

K

Kastle-Meyer test — 10.2
Keep the verb on the evidence, not on guilt — 30.4
Kinship matching (DNA via relatives) — 35.3, 35.5
Kirk Bloodsworth — 6.2 (case study 1)
Kirk Odom exoneration — 19.3, case-study-01
Kit backlog (untested kits) — 37.5
Known sample / reference sample — 3.3
Known/test impression (comparison procedure) — 16.1, 16.2, 16.3, 16.4
Kumho Tire and non-scientist expert testimony — 36.3
Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael — 5.5

L

Lab independence problem — 38.2
Lab scandals (Dookhan, Farak, Zain) — 4.6
Laboratory director / QA staff (oversight) — 40.1
laboratory error (vs. coincidental match) — 7.5
Lands and grooves — 15.2
Latent fingerprint error rate (PCAST) — 6.5, 6.6
Latent print (definition and handling) — 14.3
Law vs. science as truth-finding systems — 5.1
Lay witness vs. expert witness (opinion rule) — 30.1
Layering (laundering stage) — 27.3
Lead vs. identification — 8.5
Leading contributing factors (the five) — 34.2
Legality vs. accuracy (voluntary ≠ true) — 33.2, 33.6
Legitimate enhancement operations (brightness, contrast, sharpening, noise reduction) — 26.3
Letter form, proportion, spacing, connecting strokes — 18.2
Leucomalachite green (LMG) — 10.2
Level 1 detail (overall pattern) — 14.2
Level 2 detail (minutiae) — 14.2
Level 3 detail (pores, ridge edges) — 14.2
Library match score (interpreting vs. reporting) — 23.4
Light (optical) microscope and its resolution limit — 23.5
Lighting and visual conditions — 32.2
Likelihood ratio (LR) — 9.2, 9.5, 9.6
likelihood ratio (preview) — 7.5
Likelihood ratio vs. prior vs. posterior (the expert owns the LR) — 30.4
Likelihood-ratio framing and the verbal scale — 30.5
Limit of detection — 4.4
Limits of Benford's law (bounded/assigned data) — 27.5
Limits of Locard's principle — 3.1
Limits on interrogation length — 33.6
Lindbergh kidnapping (voluntary false confessions) — 33.3
Lindbergh ransom notes (questioned documents) — 18.6, case-study-01
Line quality (tremor, pen lifts, hesitation, pressure) — 18.2
Lineage marker — 8.4, 8.5
Linear ACE-V / analysis-before-comparison — 14.4
Lineup (live vs. photo array) — 32.4
Lineup composition / fillers (foils, distractors) — 32.3, 32.4
Lisa Roberts (cell-site overstatement, exoneration) — case-study-02
Livor mortis (as scene-movement indicator) — 2.6
Livor mortis (fixation; body movement; cherry-red) — 11.4
Locard's exchange principle — 3.1
Locard's exchange principle (impressions as one half) — 16.1
Locard's exchange principle (in practice) — 19.1, 19.6
locus / loci — 7.2, 7.4
Logical vs. physical / full-filesystem extraction — 25.4
Loop / whorl / arch (pattern families) — 14.2
Low explosives vs. high explosives (inorganic ions vs. organic molecules) — 21.4
Low-copy-number (LCN) typing — 8.2
Low-template DNA — 8.2
Lukis Anderson case — 7.6, case-study-02
Luminol — 10.2

M

M'Naghten rule — 28.2
MAC times (created/modified/accessed) — 25.3
Machine-learning "super-resolution" / hallucinated detail — 26.3
Maggot-mass self-heating — 13.3, 13.4
Major contributor — 8.3
Mandatory custodial recording (whole interrogation) — 33.6
Mandatory submission and kit-tracking reform — 37.5, case-study-01
Manner as a reasoned opinion (cross-examinable) — 11.3
Manner of death (natural/accident/suicide/homicide/undetermined) — 11.3
Mark Hofmann forgeries (artificial ink aging; shared fabrication fingerprint) — case-study-02
Marvin Anderson case (cross-race; standout photo; repeated viewing) — case-study-02
Mass fatality (definition; system overwhelmed) — 35.1
Mass graves and human-rights forensics — 35.5
Mass spectrometry — 23.3
Mass spectrum, reading a — 23.3, 23.6
Mass-fatality disaster identification — 17.4
Mass-to-charge ratio (m/z) — 23.3, 23.6
Match strength vs. candidate-pool size (prosecutor's fallacy) — 35.4
match, as probabilistic claim — 1.4
Maternal inheritance — 8.4
Maximization (exaggerating the evidence) — 33.2
Mayfield, Brandon (case study) — 1.4
Mechanism of death — 11.3
Mechanisms of structural tilt (context, colleague, success-defined-as-prosecution, funded pressure) — 38.2
Medical examiner / coroner (authority over death investigation) — 12.1
Medical examiner system — 11.1
Medical needs first (priority of care) — 37.2
Medical-forensic examination — 37.1, 37.2, 37.3
Medicolegal death investigation — 11.1
Medicolegal death investigator (MDI) — 40.1
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts (confrontation as remedy for non-independence) — 38.2, 38.5
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts (confrontation) — 4.6
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts (confrontation; analyst as witness) — case-study-01
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts (lab certificate is testimonial) — 21.3
Memory as reconstruction (vs. video-recorder model) — 32.1
Memory distortion under interrogation (link to reconstructive memory) — 33.3
Metabolite — 20.2
Metadata (data about data) — 25.3
Metadata (EXIF; GPS, timestamps); fragility and forgeability — 26.6
Metadata and container analysis — 26.4, 26.6
Metadata asymmetry (inconsistency undercuts; consistency only fails to exclude) — 26.6
Method validation — 4.4
Michael Bromwich independent investigation — case-study-02
Microbial bioterrorism / biocrime attribution — 29.2
Microbial forensics — 29.2
Microbial postmortem-interval (PMI) estimation — 29.2
Microbial trace evidence (skin-microbiome transfer) — 29.2
Microcrystalline test — 21.2
Microscopic hair comparison — 19.3
Microscopic hair comparison (failure) — 6.3, 6.5
Microscopic-hair "consistent with" heard as "his hair" — 30.4
Mill Creek evidence inventory — 3 (Case File)
Mini-STRs — 8.2
Minimization and themes — 33.2
Minimum postmortem interval (minimum PMI) — 13.1, 13.4
Minimum-speed nature of skid estimates — 36.4
Minor contributor — 8.3
Minutiae types (ending, bifurcation, dot, enclosure) — 14.2
Miranda v. Arizona — 33.2
Misidentification as a "double catastrophe" — 35.1, 35.6
Misinformation effect — 32.1
Mistaken eyewitness identification (as a factor) — 34.2
Mistaken eyewitness identification (as cause) — 6.3
Mobile forensics (the phone as a life-logger) — 25.4
Mobile phase / stationary phase — 23.2
Modus operandi (MO) — 28.3, 28.6
Molecular ion (M⁺) / molecular weight — 23.3, 23.6
Money laundering — 27.3
Motive / opportunity / means (the circumstantial triad) — 39.3
Motive vs. guilt (why vs. who) — 27.6
mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) — 8.4
Multiple points of origin (affirmative evidence) — 22.2, Case File
Multiple/two-way fiber transfers (probabilistic strength) — 19.4
Muzzle-to-target distance from GSR — 24.1

N

NAS / PCAST reports as reform story (non-implementation) — case-study-01
NAS 2009 reform recommendations — 38.3
NAS 2009 report — 1.4, 1.5, 6.4, 6.6
NAS 2009 report (on BPA) — 10.6
NAS 2009 report on firearms/toolmarks — 15.6
National Commission on Forensic Science (model code; 2017 lapse) — 38.1, 38.3, case-study-01
National Institute of Forensic Science (proposed, not created) — 38.3, case-study-01
National Registry of Exonerations — 40.5, case-study-02
National shortage of forensic pathologists — 11.1
Natural variation in handwriting — 18.2, 18.3
Natural-science degree vs. forensic science degree — 40.2
Necrobiome (microbial decomposition succession) — 29.2
negative control (reagent blank) — 7.3
Negative corpus (fallacy) — 22.4
Negative corpus in engineering (hard-hat version) — 36.3, 36.5
Net-worth method — 27.1, 27.3
Network isolation / Faraday bag — 25.1
Neurobiology of trauma (memory under stress) — 37.6
Next Generation Identification (NGI) — 14.5
NFPA 921 (Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations) — 22.2, 22.4
NIBIN / IBIS (leads, not matches) — 15.5
Ninhydrin (amino acids, porous surfaces) — 14.3
NIST (administering OSAC) — 38.4
No federal right to post-conviction DNA testing (Osborne 2009) — 34.4
Non-adversarial science vs. the adversarial legal system — 38.5
Non-blind administrator and steering/cueing — 32.3
Non-blind verification (verification as confirmation) — 31.3, 31.5, 31.6
non-coding DNA (forensic targeting of) — 7.2
Novel psychoactive substances (NPS) and fentanyl analogs (screening problem) — 21.2
Number of contributors (estimation) — 8.3

O

O. J. Simpson case (collection/contamination) — 10.3
Oblique (raking) light for indentations — 18.5
Obliterations (recovery under infrared) — 18.4
Occupational fraud (taxonomy) — 27.2
offender hit / forensic hit — 7.4
Official misconduct; Brady violation — 34.2, 34.4
Oklahoma City bombing; post-blast residue; FBI Lab OIG report (1997) — case-study-02
Organized/disorganized typology — 28.3, 28.4
Origin and cause determination — 22.2
Orthogonality (independent physical principles) — 21.3
OSAC (Organization of Scientific Area Committees) — 38.4
OSAC standards registry; voluntary compliance — 38.4
Ouhnane Daoud (the true source) — 14.6
Overstatement (definition and catalog) — 30.4
Overstatement and the word "match" — 24.6

P

Packaging and sealing — 2.4
Packaging of biological evidence (paper, not plastic) — 3.6
Packaging of fire debris (airtight) — 3.6
Page substitution — 18.4
Paint cross-section examination — 24.2
Paint refinish/repaint layers — 24.2
Paint-layer comparison — 24.2
Palynology (pollen and spores) — 13.5, 13.6
Paper-for-biology rule (why plastic ruins biological evidence) — 2.4
Parabolic droplet path — 10.5
Partial profile — 8.2
Passive / transfer / spatter stains — 10.4
Patent print — 14.3
Paternal lineage — 8.4
Pattern evidence — 3.2
Pattern injury (consistency, not individualization) — 37.4
Patterned injury — 11.5
PCAST 2016 reform demands (foundational validity before admission; error rate always) — 38.3
PCAST 2016 report — 1.5, 6.5, 6.6
PCAST 2016 report on firearms — 15.6
PCAST 2016 verdict on probabilistic genotyping — 9.3
PCR (polymerase chain reaction) — 7.1, 7.3
PEACE model — 33.6
Peak-height imbalance (stochastic) — 8.2
Peer review (as a reliability factor) — 5.4
People v. Collins — 9.4
Per se alcohol limit — 20.4
Perception and interpretation as a single process — 31.1
Perimeter (setting generously) — 2.1, 2.7
Perimortem trauma — 12.4, 12.6
Peripheral (femoral) vs. central (heart) blood — 20.2, 20.6
Persistence of trace evidence — 19.1
Person of interest: Cody Renner (excluded; near-miss wrongful conviction) — 39.2
Person of interest: Dana Whitfield (excluded) — 39.2
Person of interest: Roy Keller (not excluded) — 39.2, 39.3, 39.4
Person of interest: Victor Salas (excluded) — 39.2
Personal reforms an individual analyst can enact — 38.6
Petechiae and peri-event reported symptoms — 37.4
Phantom of Heilbronn (contaminated swabs) — 4.5
Phase 1: the scene (recovery, gridding, tagging) — 35.2
Phase 2: postmortem (PM) record — 35.2, 35.3
Phase 3: antemortem (AM) record — 35.2, 35.4
Phase 4: reconciliation — 35.2, 35.4
Phase 5: debriefing (lessons learned) — 35.2
Phases of a room fire (ignition, growth, flashover, fully developed) — 22.1
Phenolphthalein — 10.2
Photo scale — 2.2
Photogrammetry — 26.2
Photogrammetry error sources (stand point, posture, footwear, camera change, image quality) — 26.2
Physical (fracture) fit of paint — 24.2
physical (fracture) match — 1.3
Physical (jigsaw / fracture) match — 19.6
Physical evidence (definition) — 3.2
Physics/content consistency (shadows, reflections, perspective, noise) — 26.4
Placement (laundering stage) — 27.3
Plastic print — 14.3
PM/AM separation as bias discipline — 35.2
Point-counting standard (8/12/16) and its abandonment — 14.2
Pollen exine (durability) — 13.5
Pollen profile / assemblage comparison — 13.5, 13.6
Polygonal rifling — 15.2
Positive control — 3.3
Positive control, negative control, reagent blank — 4.3, 4.5
Positive vs. negative impression — 16.1, 16.2
Post-conviction DNA testing — 6.2
Post-conviction review — 34.1, 34.4
Post-identification feedback effect (confirming feedback) — 32.3, 32.5
Postmortem alcohol formation (neoformation) — 20.4, 20.6
Postmortem interval (PMI), early window — 11.4
Postmortem records (the questioned) — 17.2
Postmortem redistribution (PMR) — 20.6
Postmortem toxicology — 20.6
Postmortem trauma — 12.4, 12.5, 12.6
Postmortem-alcohol neoformation interpretation trap — case-study-02
Pour patterns / low burns (debunked) — 22.3, 22.4
Powder dusting — 14.3
Pre-empting cross by conceding limits on direct — 30.2
Pre-lineup instruction ("may or may not be present") — 32.3, 32.6
Precipitin (Ouchterlony) species test — 10.2
Predicate offense — 27.3
Presence versus conduct (DNA limits) — 9.1, 9.6
presence vs. guilt — 7.6
Present vs. impairing vs. fatal — 20.5
Preservation (refrigeration/freezing; airtight cans for volatiles) — 2.4
Presumptive color test — 21.2, 21.3, 21.6
Presumptive test — 10.1, 10.2
Presumptive vs. confirmatory test — 23.1
Presumptive vs. confirmatory testing (toxicology) — 20.3
Presumptive/confirmatory pairing — 21.3
Primary identifiers (fingerprints, dental, DNA) — 17.4, 35.3
Primary vs. secondary scene — 2.6
Primer residue (lead/barium/antimony particle) — 24.1
Prior odds / posterior odds — 9.5
Probabilistic genotyping — 9.3
Probabilistic genotyping (preview) — 8.3
Probabilistic value of class evidence — 19.6, 24.5
Product rule / multiplication of independent loci — 9.1
Proficiency testing (declared vs. blind) — 4.3
profile frequency (multiplication of loci) — 7.5
Profiling and admissibility (Daubert/FRE 702) — 28.4
Profiling on the validity spectrum (low) — 28.4
Property room / evidence storage — 4.1
Prosecutor's fallacy — 9.4
prosecutor's fallacy (preview) — 7.5
Prospective use of the NAS 2009 / PCAST 2016 validity spectrum — 29.6
Provenance — 26.6

Q

Qualification vs. method validity (the asymmetry) — 30.1
Quality assurance (QA) — 4.3
Quality control (QC) — 4.3
Quantitation (concentration measurement) — 20.1
Questioned document — 18.1
Questioned sample — 3.3

R

R v. Adams (Bayes before a jury) — 9.5
Radiographic overlay (the objective anchor) — 17.3, Case File
Radiographs (bitewing, periapical, panoramic) as antemortem material — 17.2, 17.3
Raman spectroscopy — 23.4
Random match probability (interpretation) — 9.1, 9.2
random match probability (preview) — 1.6
random match probability (RMP) — 7.5
Rapid DNA — 29.1
Rapid DNA Act of 2017 — 29.1
Rare shared features (probative weight) — 18.6, case-study-01
Rarity = distinctiveness × independence/number — 24.5
Ray Krone exoneration ("the Snaggletooth Killer") — 16.6, case-study-01
Reading a forensic job posting — 40.4
Reagent (negative) control — 3.3
Reassembling the file (every evidence type in order) — 39.1
Recognition problem — 2.3
Reconstruction (preview) — 3.5
Reconstruction names a sequence, not a suspect — 3.5
Recording confidence at the moment of identification — 32.3, 32.5
Recording only the final confession (why it fails) — 33.6
Records available / thin / unavailable — 17.2
Recovery as archaeological excavation — 12.5
Recovery of antemortem records (the rate-limiting step) — 17.2
Reference population (effect on match probability) — 9.1, 9.6
Reference sample (victim's known DNA) — 37.3
Reference standard (same-day) — 23.1, 23.3, 23.6
Reforms mapped to the cascade — 34.5
Refractive index measurement (immersion / GRIM) — 24.3
Refractive index of glass — 24.3
Reid technique — 33.2
Relatives and match probability — 9.1, 9.6
Reliable application vs. foundational validity — 5.3, 5.4
Reportable deaths — 11.1
Representative reference samples — 3.3
Restorations (amalgam, composite, crown, bridge, implant, root canal) — 17.3
Restrictions on deception / the false-evidence ploy — 33.6
Retention interval and memory decay — 32.2
Retention time — 23.2, 23.6
Retrieval as re-encoding (memory malleability) — 32.1
Retrograde extrapolation (back-calculation of BAC) — 20.4
Reuters / Adnan Hajj photo manipulation (cloning artifacts) — case-study-02
Reverse projection (scene-reconstruction height estimation) — 26.2
RFLP / DNA fingerprinting (history) — 7.1
Richard Jewell / Centennial Olympic Park bombing — case-study-01
Rifling — 15.2
Rigor mortis (heat/cold; cadaveric spasm) — 11.4
Risk factors for false confession — 33.4
Roadside drug field test (the field-test problem) — 21.6
Roadside field-test wrongful convictions (Harris County / Houston) — case-study-01
Rootless hair (mtDNA) — 8.4
Roy Brown exoneration (the difference that was overridden) — 16.6, case-study-02

S

Safety and preservation of life (responder duties) — 2.1
SANE (Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner) — 37.1
SANE-model and strangulation-recognition reform — case-study-02
Santae Tribble — 6.3, 6.5 (case study 2)
Santae Tribble exoneration — case-study-01
SART (Sexual Assault Response Team) — 37.1
Saul Kassin / Lawrence Wrightsman (false-confession typology) — 33.3
Scale, commingling, condition (the DVI problem) — 35.1
Scanning electron microscope (SEM) — 23.5
Scene security — 2.1
Schreger lines (ivory morphology) — 36.1
Scope creep (IGG) — 8.6
Scope of a digital-search warrant — 25.6
Screening vs. confirmation — 20.3
Search patterns (line, grid, spiral, zone, wheel) — 2.3
Second sin: valid methods overstated — 34.3
Secondary identifiers — 17.4
Secondary identifiers (effects, jewelry, tattoos, build) — 35.3, 35.4
Secondary transfer — 8.1
Secondary/tertiary transfer of GSR — 24.1
Securing the native video file from a DVR (overwrite loop) — 26.1
Segregation of duties — 27.2
SEM-EDX — 23.5
SEM-EDX particle identification of GSR — 24.1
Sequence and independence (chart the body first) — 17.2
Sequence of events from physical evidence — 3.5
Sequence of shots through glass — 24.3
Sequential lineup / absolute judgment — 32.4
Sequential unmasking — 31.5
Sequential-vs-simultaneous debate (contested) — 32.4
Serial-offender exposure via tested backlog kits — 37.5, case-study-01
Serology — 10.1, 10.2, 10.3
Serology-to-DNA handoff — 10.3
Sex estimation (pelvis, skull) — 12.3
Sexual-assault evidence kit — 37.3
Sharp-force injuries (incised vs. stab; hesitation/defensive wounds) — 11.5
Shed skin cells — 8.1
Shell companies — 27.3
Shirley McKie (Scottish misidentification) — case-study-02
short tandem repeat (STR) — 7.2, 7.3
Showup (single suspect) — 32.4
Signature (offender behavior) — 28.3, 28.6
Similarity score vs. probability of correctness — 29.4
Simulated (drawn) forgery vs. fluent writing — 18.2
Simultaneous lineup / relative judgment — 32.4
Situational risk factors (length, sleep deprivation, deception, minimization) — 33.4
Skeletal inventory (completeness, commingling) — 12.1
Ski-slope electropherogram — 8.2
Skin as a recording medium (elastic, mobile, changing) — 16.5
Skull fracture: trauma vs. heat artifact (deferred to Ch.12) — 11.6
Sleep deprivation and physiological depletion — 33.4
Smurfing / structuring — 27.3
SNP (single-nucleotide polymorphism) — 8.5
Soham murders / R v Huntley (convergent trace) — case-study-01
Soil biological components (pollen, diatoms, spores) — 24.4
Soil comparison — 24.4
Soil control and background sampling — 24.4
Soil mineralogy / particle-size distribution / color — 24.4
Soil stratigraphy on a boot/shovel — 24.4
Solid-state drives and TRIM — 25.3
Soot in the airways (below the larynx) — 11.6
Source-and-application-of-funds method — 27.1, 27.3
Source-device identification (sensor "fingerprint" / PRNU) — 26.4
Sources of firearms-ID error (subclass, bias, closed-set, inconclusive) — 15.4
Spalling of concrete (debunked indicator) — 22.3
Spatter — 10.4
Special protections for vulnerable suspects (juveniles, intellectual disability) — 33.6
Species determination — 10.2
Species identification (wildlife) — 36.1
Species testing (protein/DNA) — 12.2
Specimen selection (matching specimen to question) — 20.2
Spectral library / NIST database — 23.3, 23.6
Spectroscopy — 23.4
Spoliation / destruction of evidence — 27.4
SS Noronic disaster (1949 dental-ID success) — case-study-01
Stable isotopes (hydrogen/oxygen, carbon/nitrogen, sulfur, strontium) — 29.3
Stable-isotope analysis (geographic origin) — 36.1
Staff elimination database — 4.5
Staged scene — 2.6
Standard for a method vs. validity of the method's claim — 38.4
Standard of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt / preponderance) — 5.1
Standards and reference materials — 4.3
State crime laboratory (referral of complex work) — 4.1, 4.6
Stature estimation (regression equations) — 12.3
Stephan Cowans (fingerprint misidentification, DNA exoneration) — case-study-02
Stochastic effects — 8.2
STR confirmation of a genealogy/familial lead — 29.5
STR workflow — 7.3
Strangulation as medical emergency without visible injury — 37.4
Strangulation findings — 37.4
Stress and fear (impair encoding) — 32.2
Striated marks (striations) — 16.4
Striations — 15.2, 15.4
Stringing / tangent method — 10.5
Stroke sequence / line crossings — 18.4
Structural bias (vs. individual corruption) — 38.2
Structural fixes (independent labs, blind testing, court-appointed experts, disclosure) — 30.6
Structured professional judgment — 28.2
Subclass characteristics — 3.2, 15.2, 15.4
Subclass-characteristic trap — 16.4
Subjectivity ranking (where context management bites hardest) — 31.5, 31.6
Substrate (background) control — 3.3
Substrate / positive controls — 10.1, 10.3
Substrate control — 2.4
Substrate problem (skin vs. teeth) — 17.5
Survey of exonerations by contributing cause — case-study-01
Survivorship / selective storytelling in profiling — 28.4
Suspicious-activity and currency-transaction reports — 27.3
SWGDAM / NIST (validation standards) — 4.4
System variables — 32.3
Systematic bias vs. random error — 31.1

T

Takayama and Teichmann (confirmatory crystal tests) — 10.2
Taphonomy — 12.5
Teaching science to a jury (analogy as translation) — 30.2
Technical review and administrative review — 4.1, 4.6
Teeth plus a record (the method's true basis) — 17.1, 17.2
Temperature reconstruction (weather station + scene correction) — 13.3
Tendering a witness as an expert — 30.1
Terminal ballistics — 15.1
Test impressions of suspect tires — 16.3
Test-firing (water tank / gel) — 15.4
The "confirm" alarm (request to ratify vs. compare) — 31.2
The "liar's dividend" — 26.5
The "pivot" (interview-to-interrogation) — 33.2
The arc of an honest expert direct — 30.2
The conclusion as examiner's judgment — 17.3
The contamination test (volunteered + unknown + confirmed) — 33.5
The credential does not travel with the validity — 17.5
The defense's case / residual uncertainty — 39.5
The dose makes the poison (Paracelsus) — 20.5
The double cost (innocent imprisoned; guilty free) — 34.6
The embedded analyst's conflict — 38.5
The embedded laboratory / independence problem (career angle) — 40.4
The ethical forensic practitioner (the four themes as a calling) — 40.6
The fall (DNA exoneration + NAS 2009 / PCAST 2016 review) — 16.5
The four themes converging — 34.6
The four themes converging (Krone, Brown) — 16.6
The four themes lived (synthesis) — 39.6
The hired expert / "hired gun" conflict — 38.5
The honest script (may say / may not say) — 30.5
The honest verbs (excludes / consistent with / strongly supports / not "proves") — 39.4
The institutional conflict of interest — 38.5
The juror's role in the reform (CSI effect) — 38.6
The myth of the objective examiner — 31.1
The one rule: enhancement reveals, never invents — 26.3
The path to exoneration and its obstacles — 34.4
The reconciliation matrix — 35.4
The reform checklist (five questions for a trustworthy result) — 38.6
The reforms — 33.6
The rise of bite-mark testimony (Frye, ABFO) — 16.5
The same evidentiary logic across domains — 36.6
The three forensic-toxicology questions (what / how much / so what) — 20.1
The three overstatements (illusion of a match / invented number / borrowed certainty) — 19.3
The transfer problem (time of contact) — 3.4
The two faces of odontology (valid ID vs. invalid bite marks) — 17.5
The two sins of forensic failure — 34.3
The two unvalidated premises (skin as substrate; examiner reliability) — 16.5
The value of the rare (fiber rarity) — 19.4
The verb ladder (excludes / consistent with / strongly supports / proves) — 3.4
The wrongful-conviction cascade — 34.2
Therapeutic / toxic / lethal range — 20.5
Threat assessment — 28.6
Time stamp as a claim, not a fact — 26.1, 26.6
Timestamp pitfalls (clock, time zone, automation) — 25.3
Tire class characteristics (tread design, width, dimensions, noise treatment) — 16.3
Tire impression — 16.3
Tire/skid marks and speed estimation — 36.4
Tissue turnover and life-history layering (enamel/hair/bone) — 29.3
Tolerance (effect-scale shift) — 20.5
Toolmark — 16.4
Toolmark dates the act, not the actor — 16.4
Tooth surfaces (mesial, distal, occlusal, buccal, lingual) — 17.3
Tooth-numbering systems: Universal, FDI, Palmer — 17.3
Touch DNA — 8.1
touch DNA (preview) — 7.3, 7.6, Case File
Tower sector coverage area (area, not point) — 25.5
Toxicology on the validity spectrum (detection vs. interpretation) — 20.1, 20.6
Toxicology specimens (peripheral blood, vitreous) — 11.2
Trace DNA — 8.1
Trace done right: paint, glass, soil (preview Ch. 24) — 19.6
Trace evidence — 19.1, 19.2, 19.6
Trace recovery (picking, taping, scraping, vacuuming) — 19.1
Trace recovery and the "absence is not absence of a bomb" caution — 21.4
Trajectory reconstruction (rods, string, laser; cone with uncertainty) — 15.1
Transfer (primary vs. secondary) — 19.1
Transfer evidence — 3.2
Transfer problem (presence vs. action) — 10.3
transfer problem / secondary transfer — 7.6
Transfer vs. persistence — 3.1, 3.2
Transient evidence — 3.2
Transient evidence (at the scene) — 2.3
Transposed conditional — 9.4
Trauma exposure, secondary traumatic stress, burnout — 40.4
Trauma vs. responsibility (limit of the bone) — 35.5
Trauma-informed practice — 37.6
Trepal thallium poisoning case (instrumental analysis decisive) — case-study-01
Trial confidence vs. pristine first-identification confidence — 32.5
Triangulation (genealogy) — 8.5
Tunnel vision — 34.2
Tunnel vision (at the scene) — 2.1, 2.3, 2.7
Twist (direction and rate of rifling) — 15.2
Two failure modes: overstatement vs. uselessly vague hedging — 30.5
Two paths a detail reaches a confession (CRIME→SUSPECT vs. POLICE→SUSPECT) — 33.5
Two- vs. three-dimensional impression — 16.1, 16.2
Two-stage testing funnel (screen then confirm) — 10.1
Types of false confession — 33.3

U

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Fish and Wildlife Forensic Laboratory — 36.1
Ubiquity of cameras (CCTV, doorbell, dashcam, ALPR, body-worn, phones) — 26.1
Ultimate-issue problem (motive testimony) — 27.6
Ultimate-issue problem at assembly — 39.4
Ultimate-issue rule — 30.4
Ultraviolet (UV) examination — 18.4
Unallocated space — 25.3
Unanimity is not corroboration / agreement is not independence — 31.3, 31.5
Unconscious transference — 32.1, 32.6
Unidentified victims (no antemortem record) — 35.4, 35.6
Unidirectional workflow (DNA) — 4.5
Uniqueness claim (and its three gaps) — 14.1
United States v. Glynn (restricted firearms testimony) — case-study-02
Unknown-stranger theory (closed by IGG) — 39.2
Unreported / "restricted" / Jane Doe kit (storage without reporting) — 37.2, 37.3
Urine as a toxicology specimen — 20.2
UV-Vis spectroscopy — 23.4

V

V-pattern (origin indicator) — 22.1
Valid odontology (dental ID) vs. invalid bite marks (preview Ch.17) — 16.5
Validated envelope (method-plus-sample-plus-question) — 29.1, 29.6
Validation gap (forensic AI) — 29.4
Validity as applied — 6.5, 6.6
Validity debate over handwriting identification — 18.3
Validity question vs. propriety question (genetic genealogy) — 29.5, case-study-02
validity spectrum — 1.5
Validity spectrum — 6.6
validity spectrum (DNA's place on) — 7.1, 7.3, 7.6
Validity spectrum (skeletal trauma analysis) — 12.4, 12.6
Validity spectrum (translated into the Daubert factors) — 5.4, 5.6
Validity spectrum placement (foundationally valid, non-zero error rate) — 14.6
Vehicle (not driver) placed by a tire impression — 16.3
Ventilation and fire behavior — 22.1
Verbal equivalents / strength-of-evidence scales — 9.2, 9.6
Verification of a known identity (the undisputed application) — 14.1
Victim as witness (the account as evidence) — 37.2, 37.6
Video spectral comparator (VSC) — 18.1, 18.4
Violence risk assessment — 28.2
Vitreous humor — 20.2, 20.4, 20.6
Voir dire (qualification of an expert) — 30.1
Volatile memory vs. disk (acquisition dilemmas) — 25.1
Volume of distribution (in PMR) — 20.6
Voluntariness (constitutional test for admitting a confession) — 33.2, 33.6
Voluntary false confession — 33.3

W

Warrant for cell-site records (Carpenter v. United States) — 25.6
Warrants for digital search (Riley v. California) — 25.6
Weapon focus — 32.2
Weathered gasoline / ignitable-liquid pattern (chromatographic) — 23.6
Weight of evidence — 39.4
Westerfield case (dueling entomologists) — case-study-02
What an unbroken chain proves / does not prove — 2.5
What footage can establish (event, time, place, action, identity) — 26.1
What physical evidence can establish (association, exclusion, sequence, presence) — 3.4
What physical evidence cannot establish (actor, intent, time of contact, guilt) — 3.4
Why a phone does not always use the nearest tower — 25.5
Why an innocent person confesses (escape, hopelessness, compliance, memory confusion) — 33.1
Why ESDA recovery is more defensible than authorship — 18.5
Why independence is least adopted (cost, resistance, diffuse harm, status quo) — 38.2
Why most labs have not adopted context management — 31.6
Wildlife forensics — 36.1, 36.6
Wildlife ivory geographic-origin case (Wasser / USFWS lab) — case-study-01
Willingham, Cameron Todd (admissibility lesson) — 5.6
Within-examiner re-analysis design — 31.4, case-study-02
Witness as "second victim" — 32.5
Worked Benford screen (Figure 27.2) — 27.5
World Trade Center / OCME identification effort — case-study-01
Write blocker — 25.2
Wrongful conviction — 6.1, 6.3
Wrongful conviction as a public-safety failure — 34.6

Y

Y-STR — 8.4
Youth as the highest-risk group — 33.4

Z

Zero error rate (overstatement) — 6.4, 6.5