In fact, a 2009 National Research Council report on forensic science eviscerated all other identification techniques, from fingerprinting to
bite mark analysis, holding DNA as uniquely capable of reliably distinguishing between any two people on Earth.
Not exact matches
The results of other forensic methods like handwriting
analysis and the matching of fingerprints,
bite marks, bullets, and hair are usually expressed in a «match / no match» format that doesn't address how common such a match might be.
Among the areas determined to be flawed and in need of more research are: accuracy and error rates of forensic
analyses, sources of potential bias and human error in interpretation by forensic experts, fingerprints, firearms examination, tool
marks,
bite marks, impressions (tires, footwear), bloodstain - pattern
analysis, handwriting, hair, coatings (for example, paint), chemicals (including drugs), materials (including fibers), fluids, serology, and fire and explosive
analysis.
With further study, protein
analysis could join DNA
analysis to provide clear evidence in forensics, perhaps replacing subjective
analyses like
bite marks.
Hayne performed the bulk of the autopsies in the state, while West was a dentist who touted his skill in
bite -
mark analysis and his pioneering use of UV light on human skin to detect trace
markings he claimed he could match to objects.
A 1996 article by
Mark Hansen in the ABA Journal was one of the first to question West's bite - mark analysis cla
Mark Hansen in the ABA Journal was one of the first to question West's
bite -
mark analysis cla
mark analysis claims.
He didn't stop doing
bite -
mark analysis until 2006.
These tests include fingerprinting, as well as the hair, soil, and denim imprint
analysis used in Barnes's trial, and the
bite -
mark analysis from Krone's trial.