Interpretation of scientific evidence

Forensic scientists need to express their conclusions in language which is clear, understandable and not open to misinterpretation. Over the years several authors have considered the difficulties of conveying probability estimates verbally to non-scientists. In this paper, statements written by forensic scientists from different disciplines are compared. Even though the statements differ widely because of the different types of analytical work carried out, each may be placed in one of four categories. Ways in which forensic scientists might improve readers' understanding of their statements are discussed. There is a need for a dialogue between forensic scientists, police officers, lawyers and the judiciary to try and reduce mutual incomprehension.