The individualization fallacy in forensic science evidence

Michael J. Saks, Jonathan J. Koehler

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

    121 Scopus citations


    Forensic scientists across a broad array of sub-specialties have long maintained that they can link an unknown mark (e.g., a partial fingerprint or tireprint) to a unique source. Yet no scientific basis exists for this assertion, which is sustained largely by a faulty probabilistic intuition equating infrequency with uniqueness. This Essay traces the origins of the individualization claim and explicates the various failed lines of evidence and argument offered in its support. We conclude with suggestions for improving the scientific bases of the forensic identification sciences.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)199-219
    Number of pages21
    JournalVanderbilt Law Review
    Issue number1
    StatePublished - Jan 1 2008

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Law


    Dive into the research topics of 'The individualization fallacy in forensic science evidence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this