The good, the bad, the ugly: The NAS report on strengthening forensic science in America β Early 2009 was a bleak time for forensic science in the United States. Newspaper and magazine articles, op-ed headlines, television news, and radio talk shows referred to the field as 'seriously deficient' ' [4]. The event that triggered media feeding frenzy was a report of a congressionallymandated 'independent forensic science committee at the National Academy of Sciences' (NAS) . This report suggests that many fields of forensic science are under-researched, under-regulated, and oversold. It calls for structural and cultural changes in the forensic science community ranging from the separation of laboratories and police departments to an enforceable code of ethics and standardized testimony .
Part 1 of this paper describes the history of the National Academy's reports on forensic science issues. Part 2 summarizes the key parts of this new report. Part 3 considers its implications for governments, for forensic scientists, and for courts and lawyers in America. I express both pessimism (about the most dramatic proposals for reform) and optimism (about smaller but useful enhancements to the current system).