In contemporary societies, the resolution of an ever-increasing number of judicial criminal cases depends on scientific findings. They are used to reconstruct factual reality through experiments and measurements (the so-called “scientific evidence”), whose results take on a decisive weight in judicial decisions.
The ever-rising relevance of scientific evidence in judicial contexts is notoriously paired with a growing trust judicial actors lay in information obtained through scientific methods of analysis.However, it would be misleading under many aspects to presume that this evidence is more reliable than other types of evidence (e.g. witness testimony) simply through its apparent stronger objectivity. Science, too, has limits. It cannot grant absolute certainty, as often all involved actors - and, especially, courts - mistakenly tend to think.
In this context, this cutting-edge interdisciplinary project aims to introduce the typical concepts of metrology within criminal procedures. Its goal is to ensure the best possible approach to the use and assessment of so-called scientific evidence. By its very nature, indeed, metrology is the best-suited science to provide tools that can fight the above mentioned type of misconception. It can help both experts and laypeople in managing uncertainty implied by any measurement result. It is not by accident that the crucial role of metrology in the forensic field has been recently acknowledged, in the U.S., in a Report by President Obama’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. In our country, however, we are still missing a theoretical study on the “validity” of evidentiary findings, especially on the idea of “measurement uncertainty” and the criteria for its assessment: this project aims at filling this gap.
To this end, the first phase of the research shall be devoted to highlighting the issues raised by scientific evidence in judicial practice. Secondly, upon the basis of gathered results, we shall analyze the possible contributions of metrology, at the most critical crossroads linked to evidence in criminal trials. After these reflections, not only theoretical, we will define best practices and guidelines apt to grant the correct employment of metrology in criminal trials.
The project shall have a high social and institutional impact. The expected outcomes shall mainly consist of the creation and spreading of a new evidentiary culture, one that is based on the “method of doubt”. This is key to preventing cognitive biases and wrongful convictions, together with the drafting of a common language between jurists and experts. It shall serve as a tool to enhance mutual understanding, as well as to promote specific knowledge on the intrinsic validity of scientific evidence ("validity in principle” and “validity as applied" according to metrology principles).
