The Fallacy of Bite Mark Analysis

This chapter examines the controversial reliability of bite mark analysis in forensic science, revealing its lack of scientific basis and the risks it poses in legal situations. By exploring the wrongful conviction of Bill Richards, the chapter highlights the emotional toll of flawed evidence and underscores the urgent need for reform within forensic practices. It discusses the broader implications of outdated forensic methods and emphasizes the transformative role of DNA evidence in reshaping our understanding of justice.