Quote:
As a forensic scientist working for a rival private company, it is indeed a sad thing to witness an innovative and pioneering entity coming to a halt. For those who aren't aware, scientists at the FSS have been responsible for many of the most important and world-renowned advances in forensic science. It is fair to say (if a little pretentious) that we, following in their wake, are standing on the shoulders of giants.
However, the private companies currently operating in the market are staffed by experienced experts who learned their profession at the FSS and I would find it hard to accept that a majority (those perhaps not all) of those experts who are being made redundant in this move will not have the opportunity to find new positions with the companies who will be taking up the slack. Taking with them their skills (and generous redundancy packages :-o), they will have the responsibility for training and developing a new generation of scientists in this altered environment.
Forensic science provision will continue to be delivered by dedicated and competent scientists in England & Wales albeit practising in a commercially-minded market. If anybody doubts the expertise such 'capitalist' scientists offer, please read about Damilola Taylor, Rachel Nickell, and Vikki Thompson. The drive to a privatised market should produce future generations of scientists who are more rounded and professional in how they provide their expertise to the police, which is no bad thing. The reality is that much of the services that the police pay for are relatively mundane and repetitive (..and I should know!), and as such, the FSS has suffered in not being able to adapt to a market where competitors can process such work quicker and cheaper, with no appreciable drop in quality. Private companies must still adhere to strict codes of accreditation, and regularly undergo internal and external quality control procedures such as competency trials etc. just like the FSS had to.
And for those who are paranoid about scientists being pressured into delivering opinions which are swayed by our customers (i.e. the police) in this brave new world, it is to be remembered that it is the responsibility of each and every expert witness to sign their own name to a section 9 witness statement and as such, defend it in a court of law. Last time I checked, we had an adversarial justice system; any claims of bias will be dealt with by the ultimate arbiter, the court.
