It was only in 2008 that Jed Rakoff, a federal judge in New York, finally held hearings to look into the status of ballistics evidence. He suggested that it had been more reliable in the days when bullets were made from individual moulds, but was much less so in the era of mass production. ‘Whatever else ballistics can be called,’ he said, ‘it cannot fairly be called “science”.’ In the wake of Rakoff’s study, some American jurisdictions will no longer allow ballistics experts to testify to a conclusive match, and defence attorneys have much to work with in challenging ballistics evidence.
