PREAMBLE
The Scientific Working
Group for Firearms and Toolmarks (SWGGUN) was
established by the FBI in 1998 as an international
body of experts that are representative of the
experience and knowledge in the discipline of
Firearm and Toolmark Identification. The group is
comprised of 20 regular board members, an American
Society of Crime Lab Directors (ASCLD)
representative and the current President of the
Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners
(AFTE). 1
The Scientific Working
Groups have been tasked by the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) in the report entitled Strengthening
Forensic Science in the United States: A Path
Forward 2 with directing the forensic
science communities in the establishment of
standardized procedures and protocols. The following
document is in response to this request.
The following
requirements/recommendations have been approved by
the SWGGUN Board Members. While not enforceable, the
following minimum standards are strongly encouraged
to be adopted by laboratory management to ensure the
reliability of Firearm and Toolmark examination
results.
Introduction
The Science of
Firearm/Toolmark Identification continues to be
challenged by critics within the legal community and the
media. The National Academy of Sciences has issued
reports critical of the scientific foundations of the
discipline.2,3 Other critics in the
legal and academic fields have identified mistakes made by crime
laboratories which have resulted in massive overhauls of
the identified systems and evaluations of previous
casework of the affected examiners.9-13
These critics have argued that there is a lack of
empirical research and that the validity of the science
has yet to be established.9-13 They
also claim that the methods which examiners
employ during the examination and evaluation of firearm
and toolmark evidence have yet to be standardized.9-12
The reliability of the
science has been demonstrated and supported through
proficiency tests and validity studies over many
decades.14 The calculated error rates
indicate that the conclusions reached are accurate when
appropriate methods are followed by a competent
examiner.14 Methods and standards have
been established by the Association of Firearm and Tool
Mark Examiners (AFTE), the Scientific Working Group for
Firearms and Toolmarks (SWGGUN) and the American Society
of Crime Laboratory Directors/Laboratory Accreditation
Board (ASCLD/LAB). However, many of these standards and
guidelines are presently recommendations and have not
been mandated or universally applied across the United
States.
Errors in casework that
have been identified appear to have been caused by
examiners with poor ethical standards, inadequate
training,
scientifically
unsound protocols and/or
working under undue pressure to produce results.4-8
Apparently, the laboratories identified lacked
sufficient quality assurance measures necessary to
ensure a reliable work product.
The Scientific Working
Group for Firearm and Toolmark Identification (SWGGUN)
provides the following requirements/recommendations to guide forensic
science laboratory management in the development and
maintenance of a competent Firearm and Toolmark
Identification Unit. Through proper training, ethical
standards, continued education and a comprehensive
quality assurance program, the reliability of the
science can be demonstrated.
Examiner Qualifications
A comprehensive training
program is essential to ensure that an examiner obtains
the knowledge and skills necessary to accurately
evaluate evidence and articulate examination conclusions
in reports and during testimony. A quality training
program will typically take between 18 and 30 months,
and will require direction from a qualified examiner who
will serve as a Training Officer.
The SWGGUN guidelines
recommend that a firearm and toolmark trainee possess a
minimum of a “Bachelor’s degree in a natural/physical
science based field of study from an accredited academic
institution.” (Appendix
1)
A sound training program
will include all areas in which the trainee will become
qualified. Training modules should include the
following:
-
Administrative
Matters and Procedures
-
Background/History
of Firearms Identification and Current Trends
-
Firearms and
Ammunition Development and Current Trends
-
Manufacture of
Modern Firearms
-
Manufacture of
Modern Ammunition
-
Instrumentation
-
Examination of
Firearms
-
Bullet
Examinations and Comparisons
-
Cartridge/Cartridge Case Examinations and
Comparisons
-
Shotshell/Shotshell Component Examinations and
Comparisons
-
Gunshot Residue
Examinations and Distance Determinations
-
Toolmark
Examinations and Comparisons
-
Serial Number
Restoration
-
Case
Documentation, Report Writing and Expert
Testimony
-
Ethics
The trainee will be tested
through the use of training assignments, practical
exercises and competency tests. An examiner will gain
technical knowledge through training assignments
that will consist of collecting information utilizing
available resources including books, scientific
journals, relevant periodicals, reference firearm and
ammunition collections, internet, lectures and personal
communications with subject matter experts. The
application of this technical information will be in the
form of practical exercises. These exercises
include hands-on examinations of specimens which
demonstrate the trainee’s ability to apply the knowledge
gained during the training assignments. A trainee’s
proficiency of a technique or procedure will be
evaluated by the training officer through the use of
written, oral or demonstrative competency tests.
The results of these tests must be documented and
retained. Successful completion of competency tests is
necessary to satisfy the requirements of a particular
module.
Trainees are to be
afforded the opportunity to attend manufacturing
facilities including those that produce firearms, tools
and ammunition. Observing these manufacturing processes
is essential to understanding the fundamental
propositions on which the science of Firearm and
Toolmark Identification is based.
Examiners will demonstrate
their ability to professionally communicate the
technical knowledge acquired during training through
successful completion of mock cases, oral boards and
moot courts. Mock cases are designed to be
similar to casework and will encompass techniques and
procedures covered during training. Technical competency
will be evaluated through oral board assessments
by subject matter experts. Upon successful completion of
the oral boards and mock cases, a trainee will be
evaluated through moot courts. The trainee will
be expected to successfully articulate the scientific
foundations, examination procedures and results.
Certification will be
granted to the examiner by the training laboratory upon
successful completion of the training program. External
certifications are available through organizations such
as the Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners
and the American Board of Criminalistics.
The newly qualified
examiner will continue to be monitored through
supervised casework until deemed appropriate by the
training officer. Qualified examiners are to be afforded
a minimum of 20 hours annually to pursue continuing education in
their areas of expertise. An examiner must stay
abreast of developments within the field of Firearm and
Toolmark Identification by reading relevant scientific
literature and through continuing education activities
such as attending conferences, armorers courses,
manufacturing tours and/or participating in research.
Quality Assurance Measures
A comprehensive quality
assurance program will be established to ensure the
quality of the work product is reliable. The following
measures are essential in instituting a comprehensive
quality assurance program.
Standardized procedures
will be developed by a laboratory to provide guidance in
the examination, documentation and reporting of firearm
and toolmark related evidence. Part of the standardized
procedures will include a verification process where an
independent check of the evidence is performed by an
individual having expertise in the discipline
(Appendix
2).
A technical review of the case file
documentation will be performed by another qualified
examiner to ensure that the proper procedures were
utilized and that the data collected supports the
conclusions reported. An administrative review
will be performed to ensure that the case file is
complete, has been properly documented and reported
results were in accordance with the laboratory’s
policies.
Annual proficiency
tests will be completed by each examiner in the
disciplines in which they are qualified. Testimony
Evaluation will be performed periodically and
documented by appropriate personnel. This evaluation
will be reviewed by the supervisor and discussed with
the examiner.
Internal and/or
external audits of the laboratory will be performed
periodically to ensure compliance with laboratory
policies and procedures, standards established within
the discipline and standards established by accrediting
bodies. These audits will include a case file review
of a representative sample of the cases completed by
each examiner to ensure that all case documentation
complies with the policies of the laboratory and the
standards established within the discipline.
The SWGGUN strongly urges
that laboratories performing Firearm and Toolmark
Identification work be accredited by an external
accrediting body such as the American Society of Crime
Laboratory Directors/Laboratory Accreditation Board (ASCLD/LAB)
or Forensic Quality Services-International (FQS-I).
References:
-
www.swggun.org
-
Committee on
Identifying the Needs of the Forensic Science
Community, National Research Council,
“Strengthening Forensic Science in the United
States: A Path Forward,” The National Associated
Press, 2009.
-
Cork, D.L., Rolph,
J.E., Meieran, E.S. Petrie, C.V.; Committee to
Assess the Feasibility, Accuracy and Technical
Capability of a National Ballistics Database,
National Research Council, “Ballistic Imaging,”
The National Academics Press, 2008.
-
Williams, C.,
“Error-prone Detroit police crime lab shut
down,” Associated Press Archive, September 26,
2008
-
Shen, M., “Errors
found in state forensic scientist's work,”
http://www.komonews.com/news/7231231.html
-
McMenamin, J.,
“Police expert lied about credentials,”
Baltimore Sun, March 9, 2007
-
Moore, S.,
“Science Found Wanting in Nation’s Crime Labs,”
The New York Times, February 5, 2009.
-
Howard, K.,
“Ballistic Lab Shut Because of Errors,” The
Tennessean, April 12, 2008.
-
Saks & Koehler,
“The Coming Paradigm Shift in Forensic
Identification Science,” 309 Science 892, 2005.
-
Saks & Faigman,
“Failed Forensics: How Forensic Science Lost its
Way and How it
Might Yet Find It,” Annual Review of Law and
Social Science, July 2008.
-
Schwartz, A.
“Challenging Firearms and Toolmarks
Identification -- Part One,” The Champion:
National Association of Criminal Defense
Lawyers, October 2008.
-
Schwartz, A.
“Challenging Firearms and Toolmarks
Identification -- Part Two,” The Champion:
National Association of Criminal Defense
Lawyers, November/December 2008.
-
U.S. v. Glynn
(2008, S.D.N.Y) 578 F.Supp 2d
-
Nichols, R.G.,
“Defending the Scientific Foundations of the
Firearms and Tool Mark Identification
Discipline: Responding to Recent Challenges,”
Journal of Forensic Sciences, Volume 52, No. 3,
pps. 586-594, May 2007.
