In 2012, the FBI and DOJ, in conjunction with the Innocence Project and NACDL, began a review of criminal cases in which FBI microscopic hair comparison analysts gave testimony or conducted lab work. As a result of that effort, the FBI has admitted that the agents in the elite Hair and Fiber Unit of the FBI Crime Lab gave erroneous testimony in at least 90% of the hundreds of microscopic hair comparison cases reviewed. Although the results of the FBI Review are staggering, they only represent a fraction of the problem caused by flawed microscopic hair comparison analysis testimony.

This page contains materials and information related to Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis and NACDL's extensive work in the area.

Forensic science evidence presented in court is often based on speculative research, subjective interpretations and inadequate quality control procedures, according to this report. Police need to be taken out of the laboratory, and the "crime labs" need to be taken out of the police station, with the goal of ensuring the scientific integrity of forensic science evidence. Neutrality and objectivity are as essential to preventing wrongful convictions and exonerating the innocent as they are to solving crimes and convicting the guilty. [Released February 2010]

NACDL calls upon the federal government to conduct a comprehensive review of cases in which potentially flawed forensic evidence was utilized, including but not limited to those in which microscopic or visual hair comparison evidence was admitted, and to make immediate and full disclosure of the use of such evidence to the prosecution, defendant, and defense counsel in each case, ........

Letter from NACDL Executive Director Norman L. Reimer and NACDL affiliates' leadership to FBI Director James Comey regarding the FBI's policy on recording custodial interrogations, especially for those suspected of felony offenses.

NACDL commends the Department of Justice for conducting an independent root cause analysis on testimonial errors by microscopic hair analysts and for conducting a “quality review” of other disciplines to see if similar “testimonial statements” were made in other comparison disciplines. NACDL has … seen firsthand how pervasively examiners exaggerated their conclusions in hair comparison cases. Thus, this initiative by DOJ, along with its commitment to making both efforts “deliberative” and “transparent” is most welcome.

NACDL commends the DOJ for developing uniform standards for testimony and lab reports generated by the FBI, the ATF and the DEA. NACDL further commends the DOJ for releasing these standards for public comment, particularly for comment from the scientific community. … Thus, this initiative by DOJ, along with its commitment to making both efforts “deliberative” and “transparent” is most welcome. In the spirit of that commitment to a deliberative and transparent process, NACDL offers these comments on the proposed “Uniform Language for Testimony and Reports.” 

NACDL has worked collaboratively with the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Innocence Project, and the pro bono law firm Winston & Strawn on the FBI Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review since 2012, and, as a result, NACDL has seen firsthand how pervasively examiner opinions exceeded the limits of science in hair comparison cases. Thus, this initiative by DOJ, along with its commitment to a process that is “deliberative” and “transparent” is most welcome. In the spirit of that commitment, NACDL offers these comments.

The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) commends the Department of Justice (DOJ) for developing proposed uniform standards for testimony and lab reports generated by the Federal Bureau of lnvestigation (FBI), the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives, and the Drug Enforcement Administration. NACOL further commends the DOJ for releasing these standards for public comment, particularly for comment from the scientific community.

Comments to the American Society for Testing and Materials regarding proposed standard ASTM WK72597: New Standard Guide for the Microscopical Examination of Human Hair.

In the Supreme Court of Mississippi; Manning v. State of Mississippi 

An article from Crime Laboratory Digest in 1986 reviewing fire investigation and the use of hair microscopy.

An article from the Journal of Forensic Science on the combining of the analytical methods of hair comparison and mitochondrial DNA sequencing.

An article from Significance magazine on the statistical errors and flawed testimony regarding hair microscopy. 

A panel discussion in the Southwestern Journal of International Law with the honorable judges Gary Fees, Robert Bonner, Paul Hoffman, & Manny Medrano on the prosecutions following the kidnapping, torture, and murder of DEA Special Agent Enrique Camarena.