> The round recovered from the state trooper’s abdomen matched that gun. Firearms forensics is, like most criminal forensics, junk science[1]: even when the ba

> The round recovered from the state trooper’s abdomen matched that gun. Firearms forensics is, like most criminal forensics, junk science[1]: even when the basic scientific reality is aligned any particular technique, it's heavily laundered through interpretation and not subject to rigorous statistical analysis. (In particular, bullet analysis is complete nonsense. Prior to 2005 the standard technique was lead-composition analysis, which (1) assumed that all of the suspect's bullets were the same, and (2) assumed that similarly-manufactured bullets would have similar compositions. Neither is true, which is why the Federal government no longer uses it as evidence. It's unclear whether the same is true for Georgia and the GBI.) Edit: A more specific reference for ballistic analysis[2], which appears to be what the GBI used here. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_firearm_examination#Criticisms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_firearm_examination#C... [2]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X20300553?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X2...