The purpose of this Article is to analyze modern Confrontation Clause and forensic analysis jurisprudence and present six theories through which to argue that forensic analysis evidence is admissible consistent with the Confrontation Clause. The theories presented here are not intended to be employed individually, but rather combined to diminish the possibility that the Confrontation Clause will necessitate exclusion of such evidence. Part I discusses background on the Confrontation Clause. Part II describes the recent illustrative cases of Katso and Stuart. Part III presents our six theories and explores how local stakeholders might utilize Katso-like reasoning to support their positions.

中文翻译：

---

Katso 和老鼠的游戏：通过对抗条款获取法医分析证据的当前理论

本文的目的是分析现代对抗条款和法医分析法理学，并提出六种理论来论证与对抗条款一致的法医分析证据是可接受的。此处提出的理论并非旨在单独使用，而是结合使用以减少对抗条款将需要排除此类证据的可能性。第一部分讨论对抗条款的背景。第二部分描述了 Katso 和 Stuart 最近的说明性案例。第三部分介绍了我们的六种理论，并探讨了当地利益相关者如何利用类似 Katso 的推理来支持他们的立场。