An American Advantage? How American and Swiss Criminal Defense Attorneys Evaluate Forensic DNA Evidence

References

Alldridge, P. (1999). Scientific Expertise and Comparative Criminal Procedure. International Journal on Evidence & Proof, 3(3), 141–164.10.1177/136571279900300301Search in Google Scholar

Alschuler, A. W. (1997). How to Win the Trial of the Century: The Ethics of Lord Brougham and the OJ Simpson Defense Team. McGeorge Law Review, 29, 291–321.Search in Google Scholar

Aronson, J. D. (2007). Genetic Witness, Science, Law and Controversy in the Making of DNA Profiling. New Brunswick, NJ; London: Rutgers University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Bohnet, F., & Martenet, V. (2009). Droit de la profession d’avocat. Berne: Stämpfli.Search in Google Scholar

Bradley, C. M. (1996). The Convergence of the Continental and the Common Law Model of Criminal Procedure. Criminal Law Forum, 7, 471–484.10.1007/BF02197174Search in Google Scholar

Brants, C. (2008). The Vulnerability of Dutch Criminal Procedure to Wrongful Conviction. In C. R. Huff & M. Killias (Eds.), Wrongful Conviction, International Perspectives on Miscarriages of Justice (pp. 157–182). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Broeders, T. (2003). The Role of the Forensic Expert in an Inquisitorial System. In P. van Koppen & S. Penrod (Eds.), Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice (pp. 245–253). New York: Kluwer.10.1007/978-1-4419-9196-6_14Search in Google Scholar

Bromwich, M. (2007). Final Report of the Independent Investigator for the Houston Police Department Crime Laboratory and Property Room. Washington, DC: Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP.Search in Google Scholar

Burnand, Y. (2004). Liberté de la preuve et intime conviction. Revue jurassienne de jurisprudence, 1, 89–122.Search in Google Scholar

Butler, J. M. (2010). Fundamentals of Forensic DNA Typing. New York: Elsevier.Search in Google Scholar

Champod, C., & Vuille, J. (2011a). “Pas vraiment votre honneur...”: vademecum de la communication entre experts forensiques et magistrats. In M. Jendly & M. A. Niggli (Eds.), Système pénal et discours publics: entre justice câline et justice répressive (pp. 227–242). Berne: Stämpfli.Search in Google Scholar

Champod, C., & Vuille, J. (2011b). Scientific Evidence in Europe – Admissibility, Evaluation and Equality of Arms. International Commentary on Evidence, 9(1), 1–68.10.2202/1554-4567.1123Search in Google Scholar

Daly, D. J., Murphy, C., & McDermott, S. D. (2012). The transfer of touch DNA from hands to glass, fabric and wood. Forensic Science International: Genetics, 6, 41–46.10.1016/j.fsigen.2010.12.016Search in Google Scholar

Damaška, M. R. (1973). Evidentiary Barriers to Conviction and Two Models of Criminal Procedure: A Comparative Study. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 121(3), 506–589.10.2307/3311301Search in Google Scholar

Damaška, M. R. (1995). Free Proof and Its Detractors. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 43(3), 343–357.10.2307/840641Search in Google Scholar

Damaška, M. R. (1997). Evidence Law Adrift. New Haven: Yale Univ Press.Search in Google Scholar

de Keijser, J. W., Maisch, M., Leuning, E. T., Weulen Kranenbarg, M., & Lenssen, D. (2016). Differential reporting of mixed DNA profiles and its impact on jurists’ evaluation of evidence: An international analysis. Forensic Science International: Genetics, 23, 71–82.10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.03.006Search in Google Scholar

Dror, I. E., & Hampikian, G. (2011). Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation. Science & Justice, 51(4), 204–208.10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004Search in Google Scholar

Field, S., & West, A. (2003). Dialogue and the Inquisitorial Tradition: French Defence Lawyers in the Pre-Trial Criminal Process. Criminal Law Forum, 14(3), 261–316.10.1023/B:CRIL.0000037066.92478.3eSearch in Google Scholar

Flick, U. (2009). An Introduction to Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Search in Google Scholar

Fonnelop, A.E., Egeland, T., & Gil, P. (2015). Secodary and Subsequent DNA Transfer During Criminal Investigation. Forensic Science International, 17, 155–162.10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.05.009Search in Google Scholar

Frase, R. S. (1990). Comparative Criminal Justice as a Guide to American Law Reform: How Do the French Do It, How Can We Find Out, and Why Should We Care? California Law Review, 78(3), 539–683.10.2307/3480841Search in Google Scholar

Frase, R. S., & Weigend, T. (1995). German Criminal Justice as a Guide to American Law Reform: Similar Problems, Better Solutions. Boston College International & Comparative Law Review, 18, 317.Search in Google Scholar

Gibbs, G. R. (2007). Analyzing Qualitative Data. Los Angeles, London, New Dehli, Singapore: Sage.10.4135/9781849208574Search in Google Scholar

Gill, P. (2014). Misleading DNA Evidence: Reasons for Miscarriages of Justice. New York: Elsevier.Search in Google Scholar

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2008 [1967]). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New Brunswick: Aldine Transaction.Search in Google Scholar

Goldstein, A. S. (1973). Reflections on Two Models: Inquisitorial Themes in American Criminal Procedure. Standford Law Review, 26, 1009.10.2307/1227689Search in Google Scholar

Goldstein, A. S., & Marcus, M. (1977). The Myth of Judicial Supervision in Three “Inquisitorial” Systems: France, Italy and Germany. The Yale Law Journal, 87(2), 240–283.10.2307/795651Search in Google Scholar

Goray, M., & van Oorshat, R. (2015). The Complexities of DNA Transfer During a Social Setting. Legal Medicine, 17(2): 82–91.10.1016/j.legalmed.2014.10.003Search in Google Scholar

Havard, J. D. J. (1992). Expert Scientific Evidence Under the Adversarial System, A Travesty of Justice? Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 32(3), 225–235.10.1016/S0015-7368(92)73075-8Search in Google Scholar

Huff, C. R., & Killias, M. (2008). Wrongful Convictions, Conclusions from an International Overview. In C. R. Huff & M. Killias (Eds.), Wrongful Conviction, International Perspectives on Miscarriages of Justice (pp. 287–300). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jackson, J. D. (2005). The Effect of Human Rights on Criminal Evidentiary Processes: Towards Convergence, Divergence or Realignment? The Modern Law Review, 68(5), 737–764.10.1111/j.1468-2230.2005.00559.xSearch in Google Scholar

Jescheck, H.-H. (1970). Principles of German Criminal Procedure in Comparison with American Law. Virginia Law Review, 56, 239–253.10.2307/1071700Search in Google Scholar

Jositsch, D. (2013). Grundriss des schweizerischen Strafprozessrechts (2nd ed.). Zurich/St-Gall: Dike.Search in Google Scholar

Kaufmann, J. -C. (2004). L’entretien compréhensif. Paris: Armand Colin.Search in Google Scholar

Kaye, D. H. (2010). The Double Helix and the Law of Evidence. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.10.2307/j.ctv1smjv63Search in Google Scholar

Kvale, S. (2007). Doing Interviews. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore: Sage.10.4135/9781849208963Search in Google Scholar

Langbein, J. H. (1977). Comparative Criminal Procedure: Germany. St-Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.Search in Google Scholar

Langbein, J. H. (1981). Mixed Court and Jury Court: Could the Continental Alternative Fill the American Need? Law & Social Inquiry, 6(1), 195–219.10.1111/j.1747-4469.1981.tb00426.xSearch in Google Scholar

Langbein, J. H., & Weinreb, L. L. (1978). Continental Criminal Procedure: “Myth” and Reality. Yale Law Journal, 87(8), 1549–1569.10.2307/795745Search in Google Scholar

Lerner, R. L. (2001). The Intersection of Two Systems: An American on Trial for an American Murder in the French Cour D’Assises. University of Illinois Law Review, 791.Search in Google Scholar

Lind, E. A., Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1973). Discovery and Presentation of Evidence in Adversary and Nonadversary Proceedings. Michigan Law Review, 71, 1129–1144.10.2307/1287749Search in Google Scholar

Lind, E. A., & Walker, L. (1979). Theory Testing, Theory Development, and Laboratory Research on Legal Issues. Law and Human Behavior, 3, 5–20.10.1007/BF01039146Search in Google Scholar

Lynch, M., Cole, S., McNally, R., & Jordan, K. (2008). Truth Machine, The Contentious History of DNA Fingerprinting. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226498089.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Margot, P. (1998). The Role of the Forensic Scientist in an Inquisitorial System of Justice. Science & Justice, 38(2), 71–73.10.1016/S1355-0306(98)72080-5Search in Google Scholar

Meintjes-van der Walt, L. (2001). Expert Evidence in the Criminal Justice Process – A Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam: Rozenberg.Search in Google Scholar

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2003). Analyse des données qualitatives (M. H. Rispal, Trans. 2ème ed.). Bruxelles: de Boeck.Search in Google Scholar

Murphy, E. (2015). Inside the Cell: The Dark Side of Forensic DNA. New York: Nation Books.Search in Google Scholar

Oberholzer, N. (2012). Grundzüge des Strafprozessrechts (3rd ed.). Berne: Stämpfli.Search in Google Scholar

Pizzi, W. T. (1997). The American “Adversary System”? West Virginia Law Review, 100, 847–852.Search in Google Scholar

Pizzi, W. T. (2000). Trials Without Truth: Why our System of Criminal Trials has Become an Expensive Failure and What We Need to do to Rebuild it. New York: New York University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Poy, A. L., & van Oorshot, R. (2006). Trace DNA Presence, Origin, and Transfer with a Forensic Biology Laboratory and Its Potential Effect on Casework. Journal of Forensic Identification, 56(4): 558–576.Search in Google Scholar

President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). (2016). Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods; https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/pcast/docsreportsSearch in Google Scholar

Quivy, R., & Van Campenhoudt, L. (1995). Manuel de recherche en sciences sociales (2ème ed.). Paris: Dunod.Search in Google Scholar

Redmayne, M. (2001). Expert Evidence and Criminal Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198267805.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Riklin, F. (1998). Zu den Auswirkungen einer eidgenössisch vereintlichten Strafprozessordnung auf die kantonale Behördenorganisation. In Solothurner Festgabe zum schweizerischen Juristentag 1998 (pp. 641–655). Solothurn: Solothurnischen Juristenverein.Search in Google Scholar

Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2005). Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.10.4135/9781452226651Search in Google Scholar

Saks, M. J. (2003). Expert Witness in Europe and the United States. In P. van Koppen & S. Penrod (Eds.), Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice (pp. 235–244). New York: Kluwer.10.1007/978-1-4419-9196-6_13Search in Google Scholar

Schlesinger, R. B. (1976). Comparative Criminal Procedure: A Plea for Utilizing Foreign Experience. Buffalo Law Review, 26, 361.Search in Google Scholar

Sevier, J. (2014). The Truth-Justice Tradeoff: Perceptions of Decisional Accuracy and Procedural Justice in Adversarial and Inquisitorial Legal Systems. Psychology, Public Policy & Law, 20, 212–249.10.1037/law0000009Search in Google Scholar

Sheppard, B. H., & Vidmar, N. (1980). Adversary Pretrial Procedures and Testimonial Evidence: Effects of Lawyer’s Role and Machiavellianism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 320–332.10.1037/0022-3514.39.2.320Search in Google Scholar

Silverman, D. (2005). Doing Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.Search in Google Scholar

Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting Qualitative Data (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.Search in Google Scholar

Slobogin, C. (2013). Lessons from Inquisitorialism. Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper Number 13–36.Search in Google Scholar

Song, Y. S., Patil, A., Murphy, E. E., & Slatkin, M. (2009). Average Probability that a “Cold Hit” in a DNA Database Search Results in an Erroneous Attribution. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 54(1), 22–27.10.1111/j.1556-4029.2008.00917.xSearch in Google Scholar

Spencer, J. R. (1992). Court Experts and Expert Witnesses, Have we a Lesson to Learn from the French? Current Legal Problems, Part 2: Collected Papers, 45, 213–236.10.1093/clp/45.Part_2.213Search in Google Scholar

Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Search in Google Scholar

Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1978). A Theory of Procedure. California Law Review, 66, 541–566.10.2307/3480099Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, W. C. (2006). Tarnish on the “Gold Standard”: Understanding Recent Problems in Forensic DNA Testing. The Champion, 30(1), 10–16.Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, W. C. (2008). Beyond Bad Apples: Analyzing the Role of Forensic Science in Wrongful Convictions. Southwestern University Law Review, 37, 971–994.Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, W. C. (2009). Painting the Target Around the Matching Profile: The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy in Forensic DNA Interpretation. Law Probability and Risk, 8(3), 257–276.10.1093/lpr/mgp013Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, W. C. (2012). Forensic DNA Evidence, the Myth of Infallibility. In S. Krimsky & J. Gruber (Eds.), Genetic Explanations: Sense and Nonsense. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, W. C., Mueller, L., & Krane, D. E. (2012). Forensic DNA Statistics: Still Controversial in Some Cases. The Champion. (December), pp. 12–23.Search in Google Scholar

van Kampen, P. T. C. (1998). Expert Evidence Compared, Rules and Practices in the Dutch and American Criminal Justice System. Antwerpen/Groningen: Intersentia Rechtswetenschappen.Search in Google Scholar

van Kampen, P. T. C. (2003). Expert Evidence, the State of the Law in the Netherlands and the United States. In P. J. van Koppen & S. D. Penrod (Eds.), Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice: Psychological Perspectives on Criminal Justice Systems (pp. 209–234). New York: Kluwer.Search in Google Scholar

van Kessel, G. (1991). Adversary Excesses in the American Criminal Trial. Notre Dame Law Review, 67, 403.Search in Google Scholar

van Koppen, P. (2008). Blundering Justice, The Schiedam Park Murder. In R. Kocsis (Ed.), Serial Murder and the Psychology of Violent Crimes (pp. 207–228). Totowa, NJ: Humana Press.10.1007/978-1-60327-049-6_12Search in Google Scholar

van Koppen, P. J., & Penrod, S. D. (2003). Adversarial or Inquisitorial: Comparing Systems. In P. J. van Koppen & S. D. Penrod (Eds.), Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice: Psychological Perspectives on Criminal Justice Systems (pp. 1–19). New York: Kluwer.10.1007/978-1-4419-9196-6Search in Google Scholar

Volkmann-Schluck, T. (1981). Continental European Criminal Procedures: True or Illusive Model? American Journal of Crime Law, 9, 1.Search in Google Scholar

Vuille, J. (2011). Ce que la justice fait dire à l’ADN (et que l’ADN ne dit pas vraiment): étude qualitative de l’évaluation de la preuve par ADN dans le système judiciaire pénal suisse Lausanne: Ecole des Sciences Criminelles.Search in Google Scholar

Vuille, J. (2013). Admissibility and Appraisal of Scientific Evidence in Continental Europe Criminal Justice Systems: Past, Present and Future. The Australian Journal of Forensic Science, 45(4), 1–9.10.1080/00450618.2012.738248Search in Google Scholar

Vuille, J., Biedermann, A., & Taroni, F. (2013). The Importance of Having a Logical Framework for Expert Conclusions in Forensic DNA Profiling, Illustrations from the Amanda Knox Case. In C. R. Huff & M. Killias (Eds.), Wrongful Convictions and Miscarriages of Justice, Causes and Remedies in North American and European Criminal Justice Systems (pp. 137–159). New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Vuille, J., & Taroni, F. (2011). L’article 184 al. 3 CPP, une fausse bonne idée du législateur? Revue pénale suisse, 129(2), 164–179.Search in Google Scholar

Weinreb, L. L. (1977). Denial of Justice: Criminal Process in the United States. New York: Free Press.Search in Google Scholar

Wicki, F. (2011). Einleitung. In M. A. Niggli, M. Heer, & H. Wiprächtiger (Eds.), Schweizerische Strafprozessordnung, Basler Kommentar (pp. 3–17). Bâle: Helbing Lichtenhahn.Search in Google Scholar

Willis, S. (2009). Forensic Science, Ethics and Criminal Justice. In J. Fraser & R. Williams (Eds.), Handbook of Forensic Science (pp. 523–545). Cullompton, UK: Willan Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Zoppis, S., Muciaccia, B., D’Alessio, A., Ziparo, E., Vecchiotti, C., & Filippini, A. (2014). DNA Fingerprinting Secondary Transfer From Different Skin Areas: Morphological and Genetic Studies. Forensic Science International: Genetics 11, 137–143.10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.03.005Search in Google Scholar