Links
Forum Menu
User Info
Who's Online
Board Stats
 Total Members: 2430- Total Posts: 88662
- Total Topics: 15192
- Total Categories: 5
- Total Boards: 63
- Most Online: 721
|
Search
1
Come join us in our new facility, where the cost of living is much lower than other areas of the country and the city is home to numerous conventions, sports teams of all levels, awesome zoo and children's museum and more. https://www.governmentjobs.com/careers/indianapolis/jobs/4736989/forensic-scientist-firearms
2
« Last post by Jessica Winn on November 19, 2024, 10:14:20 AM »
Hi Everyone. We may be out of rooms for Friday, and unfortunately our booking rep has been out of the office.
Please be patient with us as we try to open up some more rooms. You can also email me at jessica.winn@doj.ca.gov and I'll be able to help you directly.
I hope to post later today with more information.
3
I was looking at the hotel today and it does not seem to have any availability for Friday May 16.
4
« Last post by Jessica Winn on November 18, 2024, 06:27:13 PM »
This topic has been moved to the Member Forum - Helpful Examination Hints/Procedures/Information.
5
« Last post by Jessica Winn on November 18, 2024, 02:45:54 PM »
Hi all! Just a reminder as you start to book your flights to Anaheim in 2025, to try to book a flight into John Wayne Airport, Orange County ( www.ocair.com). This airport is ~20 minutes from the hotel. Ride share (Uber/Lyft) are very easy to find in the John Wayne Airport. A second recommendation is to avoid landing during rush hour traffic (7 am - 9 am and 4 pm - 6 pm). If you are unable to avoid landing during this time, unfortunately, your travel time from John Wayne to the hotel will increase to ~ 40 minutes or more. You can also book flights into Long Beach or Los Angeles, but please expect longer commute times depending on the time of day. For example, landing at LAX (Los Angeles) can take anywhere from 40 min (no traffic) to 2.5 hours (lots of traffic).
6
Alan, Thanks for posting this! Saved me some time! 
7
« Last post by Alan Zheng on November 14, 2024, 10:48:39 AM »
Hicklin RA, Parks CL, Dunagan KM, Emerick BL, Richetelli N, Chapman WJ, Taylor M, Thompson RM. (2024). “Accuracy and Reproducibility of Bullet Comparison Decisions by Forensic Examiners.” Forensic Science International, 365(112287). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2024.112287 This link (https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1k5mM1MCG0dvPk) allows FREE downloading of the paper until 2 January 2025.Please note that in addition to the main article, extensive information is included in supplemental information, including Detailed appendices (https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0379073824003694-mmc1.pdf), All response data in data tables (https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0379073824003694-mmc2.xlsx),Images of the comparison sets used in the study (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/6XAMU).The study was conducted by Noblis and NIST under NIST Cooperative Agreement 70NANB18H232.
For all Noblis forensic science publications, please see https://noblis.org/publications/.
Abstract
Few previous studies have assessed the accuracy and reproducibility of bullet comparison decisions by firearms examiners, and none have evaluated accuracy of examiners’ decisions when comparing damaged bullets, comparisons of questioned bullets, or the effects on decision rates of using jacketed hollow-point vs. full metal jacket bullets. In this study, 49 practicing forensic firearms examiners conducted 3,156 comparisons of bullets, including bullets ranging in quality, bullets from different types of ammunition, and bullets fired from various makes/models of firearms. The study evaluated two scenarios commonly used in casework: questioned-questioned (QQ) comparisons of two bullets from unknown sources, and known-questioned (KQ) comparisons in which a bullet from an unknown source is compared to three known exemplars from a single firearm. Key findings: after controlling for other factors, QQ vs. KQ comparisons had relatively limited effects on decision rates; rates of inconclusive responses were inversely related to bullet quality; bullets fired from polygonally-rifled pistols resulted in more inconclusive or unsuitable responses than conventional rifling; on nonmated comparison sets, the rate of (true) exclusions was particularly high when comparing different caliber bullets, and was higher on comparisons of different makes/models of firearms vs. the same model of firearm; comparisons in which different types of ammunition were fired from the same firearm had a high rate of erroneous exclusions; decision rates differed notably by firearm model; decision rates varied notably among the participants. Because the measured rates vary dramatically due to these various factors, we recommend against using overall decision rates to summarize the results of this study.
8
« Last post by Xai Xiong on November 05, 2024, 03:46:00 PM »
The Wisconsin Department of Justice - Division of Forensic Sciences is currently recruiting to fill a vacancy for a Firearms and Toolmark Examiner to join their team. This position will be headquartered at the Wausau Crime Laboratory, located at 7100 Stewart Ave. in Wausau, WI. Please use the link to apply. https://wj.wi.gov/psc/wisjobs/CAREERS/HRMS/c/HRS_HRAM_FL.HRS_CG_SEARCH_FL.GBL?Action=U&Page=HRS_APP_JBPST_FL&SiteID=1&FOCUS=Applicant&JobOpeningId=15947&PostingSeq=1
9
« Last post by Alan Zheng on November 05, 2024, 11:05:58 AM »
Hi everyone. I'd like to announce that the first best practice document has been completed. Thank you all for your patience as we developed and vetted this document through our working group and public comments. I'd like to thank all those involved. As always, please feel free to get in touch with us if you have any questions. "Best Practice Guide for the Calibration and Quality Control of 3D Surface Topography Measurement Instruments Used for Virtual Comparison Microscopy (VCM)"Scope: This best practice guide describes the calibration, verification, and monitoring of 3D surface topography measurement instrument metrological characteristics that may affect virtual comparison microscopy (VCM) of toolmarks. Best practice requires calibration or verification of these metrological characteristics before the application of instrument measurement data to VCM. This guide provides quality control procedures to detect significant changes in the metrological characteristics relative to their calibrated state. This guidance document is applicable to the development of a quality control system for a single 3D surface topography measurement instrument. https://twg3d2t.org/documents/
|
Countdown Clock
Recent Posts
Indianapolis-Marion County Forensic Services Agency - Firearms Examiner opening by Richard Amberger
[Yesterday at 03:45:01 PM]
Re: AFTE 2025! Book your hotel now! by Jessica Winn
[November 19, 2024, 10:14:20 AM]
Re: AFTE 2025! Book your hotel now! by Jennifer Floyd
[November 19, 2024, 09:33:25 AM]
MOVED: Comparing a bullet jacket to two bullet cores by Jessica Winn
[November 18, 2024, 06:27:13 PM]
Booking your Flight?! by Jessica Winn
[November 18, 2024, 02:45:54 PM]
Re: Noblis/NIST Forensic Bullet Examination Black Box Study Published by Robert Thompson
[November 14, 2024, 01:41:08 PM]
Noblis/NIST Forensic Bullet Examination Black Box Study Published by Alan Zheng
[November 14, 2024, 10:48:39 AM]
Headstamp Guide
|
Guests: 397
Hidden: 0
Users: 0
Recent Posts