Methodological Features of Validating Forensic Expert Techniques

Abstract

The article reviews and summarizes the experience of validating forensic expert techniques in the Russian Federal Centre of Forensic Science of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation. The authors point out the methodological features of practical implementation of the validation procedure. They demonstrate that the specificity, diversity, and complexity of the objects of expert study require the classification of the applied methods in terms of metrology, identification of the main validation parameters of quantitative and qualitative methods, organization of experiments, and evaluation of validation parameters using mathematical analysis methods. They also propose to divide methods into two types: forensic expert measurement methods (FMT) and forensic expert testing methods (FTT). Based on the generalization of information presented in several regulatory documents and scientific publications, the following parameters are identified for FMT: metrological characteristics or properties of the method (specificity, linearity, sensitivity, range of determined values, detection limit, quantitative determination limit) and quality indicators of the method (precision, correctness, accuracy of the analysis result, or uncertainty). When validating FTT, it is proposed to evaluate the reliability of the method and the competence of the expert.An experiment to assess validation parameters is performed using enough control samples with established characteristics of controlled indicators and with the participation of a sufficient number of experts. Requirements for control samples are provided.The authors also give examples of probabilistic evaluation of validation parameters for two qualitative testing methods: microscopic examination of textile fibers and detection of gunshot residue using scanning electron microscopy and X-ray microanalysis. The reliability of these methods is assessed by calculating the likelihood ratio, and the specificity of interpreting the results of FMT and FTT validation is noted.The decision on compliance with the requirements is made if the interval of the established extended uncertainty for the obtained result does not exceed the tolerance field. In the absence of tolerances, FMT is considered suitable for solving forensic expert tasks if the values of the extended uncertainty of the measurement results of the controlled indicator do not exceed the values established during validation. For FTT, a low probabilistic proportion of false positive and false negative results in determining the presence/absence of controlled indicators, as well as experimentally confirmed competence of the expert during validation, are indicators of the suitability of the method for its intended use