Experimental design for acquiring relevant data to address the issue of comparing consecutively manufactured tools and firearms

References 

1. Evett IW, Weir BS. Interpreting DNA Evidence – Statistical Genetics for Forensic Scientists. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates Inc.; 1998;
2. Curran JM, Hicks TN, Buckleton J. Forensic Interpretation of Glass Evidence. London: CRC Press; 2000;
3. Frye v The United States of America, 54 AppDC 46, 293, Fed 1013, 1923.
4. Moran B, Murdock J. Joseph Rameriz vs. State of Florida — Supreme Court decision December 20, 2001. AFTE Journal. 2002;34(2):215–226
5. Garcia CH. Are “knife-prints” reliable evidence: an analysis of tool mark evidence and Ramirez v. State. AFTE Journal. 1993;25(4):266–280
6. Nichols RG. Firearm and toolmark identification criteria: a review of the literature. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 1997;42(3):466–474
7. Risinger DM, et al. The Daubert/Kuhmo implications of observer effects in forensic science: hidden problems of expectation and suggestion. California Law Review. 2002;90(1):1–56
8. Saks MJ, et al. Context effects in forensic science: a review and application of the science of science to crime laboratory practice in the United States. S & J. 2003;43(2):77–90
9. Baker H. The microscope made easy Ch 15: Cautions in viewing objects. 1742;
10. Hodge EE. Guarding against error. AFTE Journal. 1988;20(3):290–293
11. Rosenberry JL. Firearm/toolmark examination and the Daubert criteria. AFTE Journal. 2003;35(1):38–48