Introduction: Forensics Fail?

This year marks the 25th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow pharmaceuticals, inc., which fundamentally reshaped how judges evaluate scientific and expert evidence.1 this volume of judicature, with three wonderful contributions by Jay Koehler, pate skene, and an expert team led by William Thompson, comes at an ideal time to reconsider how successful the modern judicial approach to expert evidence has been. That approach is now reflected in federal rule of evidence 702, revised in 2000 to comport with the Daubert ruling, and in state judicial rulings and state rules of evidence, which have followed suit in most states.