One standard to find them, One standard to bring them all and in the darkness bind them....
Of course regulation of the forensic market is the right thing to do and is something that is long overdue.
The forensic regulator has recently recommended that one body be responsible for accrediting forensic science providers so that they can supply the Criminal Justice System. The regulator also believes that organisational accreditation combined with the adoption of national occupational standards is the standard required and that if a provider achieves that standard, there is no further need for individual scientists to have their competence assessed by any body external to their own organization. From inside the industry looking out, this looks like a real case of the cobbler wearing the worst shoes.
The regulators plans are, in many ways, quantum leaps forward from where we were ten years ago prior to the formation of CRFP. The focus on organizational quality is important because, at least in theory, it should make it much more difficult for the likes of Gene Morrison to operate, and that is most welcome. However, the issues with institutional forensic science in high profile cases in recent years have not been focussed on organizational failings, but on individual scientists.
The enquiry into the forensic investigation in the case of Damilola Taylor concluded that :"...there was no systemic failure in the operations of the FSS; there were however human failures in implementing operating procedures". It went on to recommend widening the scope of the external assessment of competence of individuals as a means of addressing these human failures. So why has the regulator made recommendations removing external means of assessing individuals from the entire quality structure?
The regulators recommendations address only the institutional element of quality. It is not enough. If quality in forensic science provision means only adopting institutional quality and occupational standards alone without a system for the external measurement of competence of the individual scientist, the profession will be thrust back into the past. Back then some providers were accredited to the relevant BSI standard and the employers certified their own scientists competence internally. It was precisely the environment in which the failures in the Damilola Taylor investigation occurred - so how do the new proposals ensure that this won't happen again?
We have an opportunity to lay the foundations for better forensic science provision to the CJS. It must include transparent, discoverable, external assessment of individuals to move us all forward.
Otherwise we will find ourselves back to where we started, all bound together in the darkness...
