Inconclusive Conclusions in Forensic Science: Rejoinders to Scurich, Morrison, Sinha & Gutierrez

We agree with Scurich (2023) that when an examiner knows that he or she is being tested, the results of such a test is highly suspect. If an examiner can avoid making errors by deeming a comparison to be inconclusive, and if inconclusives are never deemed to be indicative of an error, then a “strategic” examiner can inflate accuracy levels by rendering an inconclusive decision for any difficult test. Such a test will not provide an unbiased measure of an examiner’s accuracy. But this is not reason enough to change the way accuracy is measured. We support the view expressed in Morrison (2023), but in our paper we accepted the world as it currently exists, one in which examiners use categorical conclusions. Finally, we agree with Sinha and Gutierrez (2023) that blind testing will not resolve all of the issues mentioned in their final sentence. But we think that it would be a major step in the right direction.