DPA 2025 Annual Conference

This presentation will consider the purposes of a forensic autopsy or case review, focusing on cases in which the original forensic pathologist / medical examiner or other expert made a non-evidence-based diagnosis without scientific foundation, thereby catalyzing criminal charges. In many of these cases, simple searches of readily available forensic literature, much of it in well-known book or journal form on most MEs shelves, could have prevented the defendant’s travails. The presentation will extrapolate from these cases to touch upon commonly encountered errors, confirmation biases, the logical fallacy of post hoc ergo proper hoc, as well as basic medical and forensic principles to which all forensic scientists should adhere and be examined upon in criminal or civil proceedings. To quote Saukko and Knight: “over-interpretation […] regrettably still leads to instances of miscarriage of justice.” We will also hear from counsel, discussing =how best to work with your retained medical expert, such as a forensic pathologist, not only in preparing your defense, but also in crafting and conducting your cross examination of the State’s pathologist and it’s other medical experts. Whitney will discuss how not retaining an expert or working effectively with your expert at the trial stage can affect your client’s case at appeal and post-conviction stages.