The development of a core forensic standards framework for Australia

James Robertson, Karl Kent, Linzi Wilson-Wilde

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    Forensic laboratories, and less so field forensic organizations, are familiar with the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and other standards principally through third-party accreditation against ISO 17025. However, there are a limited number of forensic-specific standards. The often quoted 2009 National Research Council (NRC) andNational Academies (NAS) report on strengthening forensic science identified the lack of formal standards as amajor issue.Where such standards do exist, such as the American Society for Testing and Materials' (ASTM International) forensic standards, they are usually very specific to a particular technique. This paper describes the development of a different approach in Australia. Recognizing the end-to-end nature of the forensic enterprise from crime scene to the court, a standard has been developed that is intentionally not discipline-specific. In four parts, this standard (AS 5388) covers the recognition, recording, recovery, transport and storage of material (Part 1,) the analysis of material (Part 2), interpretation (Part 3), and reporting (Part 4). The management of the process that was used to develop this standard is described, and lessons for the future development of standards identified and discussed. Finally, how this standard can be used as a platform for the development of discipline standards and as an international standard is discussed.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)59-67
    Number of pages9
    JournalForensic Science Policy & Management: An International Journal
    Volume4
    Issue number45385
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2013

    Keywords

    • forensic sciences
    • accreditation
    • interpretation
    • development

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'The development of a core forensic standards framework for Australia'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this