تسجيل الدخول

تسجيل

THE ETHICS OF EMPLOYMENT STATUS

المؤلف:  Max M. Houck، Jay A. Siegel

المصدر:  Fundamentals of Forensic Science

الجزء والصفحة:  p662-663

2026-09-12

19

THE ETHICS OF EMPLOYMENT STATUS

Most practicing forensic scientists in the United States work for a laboratory that is under the administrative control of a unit of government, federal, state, regional, or local. Most of these laboratories are within a law enforcement agency such as a police department, sheriff’s department, or prosecutor’s office. Public forensic science laboratories are supported by the taxpayers of that governmental unit and the scientists are paid a salary for their work. Forensic scientists who work in public lab oratories are often viewed by workers in the justice system and in the general public as being part of the police department, for example, and they are viewed as being part of the police team even though the forensic scientists view themselves as unbiased, neutral scientists. This is a form of attribution bias, discussed earlier: The assumption is that because the scientists work for the police, they hold the same views. Other forensic scientists make their living working for nongovernmental labo ratories in the private sector. A few of these private laboratories perform services for governmental agencies. The Northern Illinois Forensic Science Laboratory does work for police agencies in Northeast Illinois, for example. Most private laboratories get most of their work from criminal defendants or in civil cases where they may work for either party. The scientists who work for these private laboratories may also receive a salary for their services. Still other forensic scientists have one-person laboratories and they receive a fee for service. They also do most of their work for criminal defense or in civil cases. They also face issues of attribution bias. It is a com mon tactic for a prosecutor to question a defense expert forensic scientist about the fees that they are collecting for appearing in court, implying that the expert is saying what he or she is being paid to say and is thus biased and unethical. This leads to the issue of the hired gun. This is an expert witness who gains a reputation for, in effect, offering testimony that is suited to the client for a fee. Hired guns are viewed to be unethical because they tailor their testimony to the needs of the client without regard to what the science says. They will do tests and select the results that fit their testi mony. In addition, many expert witnesses will build their practice by working only as plaintiff’s expert or defense expert. Thus, they are not only hired guns, but they will only work for the same side of a case in all cases, regardless of the merit. Sometimes charges of prosecution bias will be leveled at forensic scientists who work for a gov ernmental agency such as a police department. The fact is that this is the nature of their employment. Most public forensic science laboratories are required by statute to accept cases only from law enforcement agencies and may not be permitted to work for a defense attorney. Calling these scientists hired guns is misleading.