8127/frame/fm

 
c.
What Evidence Was Tested?
The internal reviewer should check the evidence received against the evidence
tested to make sure nothing major was missed, at least from his perspective.
Obviously an analyst’s choice of evidence, perhaps as suggested by the inves-
tigator, will influence the results. The independent reviewer might like to see
other items tested. This, of course, assumes he actually knows about them. With
the advent of specialty laboratories, such as DNA and drugs, which may receive
only selected items of evidence in a case to test, the independent reviewer
might have to look back to the originating laboratory or even the detective’s
report to find a complete listing of evidence collected in a particular case.
 
d.
Data and Results
The most obvious function of the internal reviewer is to check the veracity
and integrity of the results and to verify that they support the conclusions.
This includes checking for clerical errors as well as confirming judgment
calls. The reviewer will also check a second reader’s calls against the primary
analyst’s and verify that no substantive differences exist.
Because the independent reviewer must verify (or disagree) that the data
support the final results, the original data must be available for inspection. It
is not unreasonable to expect the reviewer (usually through an attorney) to
ask for the primary data, but he should not have to ask three times. Occa-
sionally, the data may be difficult or expensive to reproduce, or the original
item may be needed for independent verification. In these instances, the
reviewer should be willing to travel to the laboratory where the original work
was done to view these items. The data and results should be accompanied
by a complete and detailed documentation of the work as performed.