Forensic evidence plays a critical role in court proceedings and the administration of justice. It is a powerful tool that can help convict the guilty and avoid wrongful conviction of the innocent. Unfortunately, flaws in forensic evidence are increasingly becoming apparent. Assessments of forensic science have too often focused only on the data and the underlying science, as if they exist in isolation, without sufficiently addressing the process by which forensic experts evaluate and interpret the evidence. After all, it is the forensic expert who observes the data and makes interpretations, and therefore forensic evidence is mediated by human and cognitive factors. A U.S. National Research Council examination of forensic science in 2009, followed by a 2016 evaluation by a presidential panel, along with a U.K. inquiry into fingerprinting in 2011 and a 2015 guidance by the U.K. Forensic Science Regulator, have all expressed concerns about biases in forensic expert decision-making. Where does forensic bias come from, and how can we minimize it?

中文翻译：

---

法医专家的偏见

法医证据在法庭诉讼和司法行政中发挥着关键作用。它是一个强大的工具，可以帮助定罪并避免对无辜者的错误定罪。不幸的是，法医证据的缺陷越来越明显。对法医科学的评估往往只关注数据和基础科学，就好像它们是孤立存在的，没有充分解决法医专家评估和解释证据的过程。毕竟，观察数据并做出解释的是法医专家，因此法医证据是由人为因素和认知因素介导的。2009 年美国国家研究委员会对法医科学进行了检查，随后在 2016 年由总统小组以及英国进行了评估 2011 年对指纹识别的调查和英国法医科学监管机构 2015 年的指导，都表达了对法医专家决策偏见的担忧。法医偏见从何而来，我们如何将其最小化？