CSFS Document Section Position on the Logical Approach to Evidence Evaluation and Corresponding Wording of Conclusions

R. Brent Ostrum
{"title":"CSFS Document Section Position on the Logical Approach to Evidence Evaluation and Corresponding Wording of Conclusions","authors":"R. Brent Ostrum","doi":"10.1080/00085030.2019.1635736","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article presents the position of the Document Section of the Canadian Society of Forensic Science (CSFS) regarding the use of an evaluation and reporting scheme often referred to as “the logical approach to evidence evaluation.” The section’s position is the logical approach to evidence evaluation and reporting, and is an appropriate and effective option for forensic document examination (FDE) work when implemented as outlined in this paper.","PeriodicalId":44383,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal","volume":"52 1","pages":"129 - 138"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00085030.2019.1635736","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00085030.2019.1635736","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract This article presents the position of the Document Section of the Canadian Society of Forensic Science (CSFS) regarding the use of an evaluation and reporting scheme often referred to as “the logical approach to evidence evaluation.” The section’s position is the logical approach to evidence evaluation and reporting, and is an appropriate and effective option for forensic document examination (FDE) work when implemented as outlined in this paper.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
CSFS文件部分对证据评价的逻辑方法的立场和相应的结论措辞
本文介绍了加拿大法医科学学会(CSFS)文件部关于使用评估和报告方案的立场,通常被称为“证据评估的逻辑方法”。该部分的地位是证据评估和报告的逻辑方法,并且在本文概述的实施过程中是法医文件检查(FDE)工作的适当和有效的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Possible dependence of sternum non-metric features on sex, age, and stature from a forensic viewpoint: a study in an Iranian population Background and persistence of fibers on vehicle seat belts A fatal motor vehicle collision involving multiple novel psychoactive substances Intra- and inter-rater reliability of a manual codification system for footwear impressions: first lessons learned from the development of a footwear database for forensic intelligence purposes Individual age estimation using pulp-to-tooth area ratio in single-rooted teeth
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1