|
|
William C. Thompson
|
Professor and Chair
Ph.D. Stanford University; J.D., University of California, Berkeley
Phone: 824-1437
Office: 2340 SE II
I am interested in the use of expert evidence in the courtroom, including:
- Forensic science, particularly forensic DNA tests
- Statistical testimony
- Social science evidence of all types
I study and write about the strengths and limitations of various types of evidence and about the ability of lay juries to evaluate evidence. My work is multidisciplinary, it involves law, psychology, various areas of biology (particularly genetics and molecular biology), and statistics.
|
Web Links of Research Sites
Selected Publications
-
Kaasa, S.O., Peterson, T., Morris, E.K., & Thompson, W.C. (2007). Statistical inference and forensic evidence: Evaluating a bullet lead match. Law & Human Behavior, 31(5), 433-447.
- Koehler, J.J. & Thompson, W.C. (2006). Mock jurors’ reactions to selective presentation of evidence from multiple-opportunity searches. Law & Human Behavior, 30, 455-468.
-
Tobin, W.A. & Thompson, W.C. (July 2006). Evaluating and challenging forensic identification evidence. The Champion, 30, 12-21. (Cover article)
-
Thompson, W.C. (2006). Tarnish on the 'gold standard:' Understanding recent problems in forensic DNA testing. The Champion, Jan-Feb, 14-20.
- Thompson, W.C. (2005) Analyzing the relevance and admissibility of bullet-lead evidence: Did the NRC report miss the target? Jurimetrics, 46, 65-89.
- Quas, J.A., Thompson, W.C., & Clarke-Stewart, C.K.A. (2005) Do jurors "know" what isn't so about child witnesses? Law and Human Behavior, 29, 425 : 456.
- Thompson, W.C., Taroni, F. & Aitken, C.G.G. (2003). How the probability of a false positive affects the value of DNA evidence. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 48(1), 47-54.
- Risinger, D.M., Saks, M.J., Thompson, W.C. & Rosenthal, R. (2002). The Daubert/Kumho implications of observer effects in forensic science: Hidden problems of expectation and suggestion. California Law Review, 90(1), 1-56.
-
Thompson, W.C. & Pathak, M.K. (1999). Empirical Study of Hearsay Rules: Bridging the Gap Between Psychology and Law. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 5(2), 456-472 (1999).
-
Thompson, W.C., Clarke-Stewart, K.A., & Lepore, S.J. (1997). What did the janitor do? Suggestive interviewing and the accuracy of children's accounts, Law & Human Behavior, 21(4), 405-426.
-
Thompson, W.C. DNA Evidence in the O.J. Simpson Trial, Colorado Law Review , 67 (4), 827-857 (1996).
-
Thompson, W.C. Subjective interpretation, laboratory error and the value of DNA evidence: Three case studies, Genetica , 96: 153-168 (1995).
-
Thompson, W.C. Evaluating the admissibility of new genetic identification tests: Lessons from the "DNA War". Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 84, 22-104 (1993).
-
Thompson, W.C. & Ford, S. DNA typing: Acceptance and weight of the new genetic identification tests. Virginia Law Review, 1989, 75, 45-108
-
Thompson, W.C. Death qualification after Wainwright v. Witt and Lockhart v. McCree. Law and Human Behavior , 1989, 13, 185-215.
-
Thompson, W.C. & Schumann, E.L. Interpretation of statistical evidence in criminal trials: The prosecutor's fallacy and the defense attorney's fallacy. Law and Human Behavior , 1987, 11, 167-187.
|
|
