Eric Ray and Glenn Langenburg catch up after an extended hiatus and then review the recent PCAST report. The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology issued a scathing report calling for the end of many forensic disciplines. The Double Loop Podcast responds.

Glenn and Eric first cover the new resolution that came out of the IAI 2016 Conference. They then perfectly segue into a conversation on the recent decision to order the release or retrial of Brandon Dassey based on problems with his confession and initial attorney.

Eric Ray hosts the Double Loop Podcast panel discussion at the 2016 IAI Conference in Cincinnati with Glenn Langenburg joining in remotely. Panelists Henry Swofford, Jessica Cino, and Jeniffer Molina discuss latent print conclusions, new wording, court challenges, and other related topics.

Eric is joined by guest co-host Heidi Eldridge in interviewing Hughes Dicaire from Ontario and Christina Amendola and Jenna Alimberti from Massachusetts on interesting lectures and workshops from the 2016 IAI conference in Cincinnati.

Glenn Langenburg and Eric Ray interview Lisa Steele about lawyer stuff, current fingerprint issues, Chicago cases, and just generally get an attorney's perspective on latent prints and forensic evidence.

Glenn Langenburg and Eric Ray finish their discussion of the OJ Simpson trial, the FX OJ dramatization, and the OJ 30 for 30. Mark Fuhrman, Lance Ito, Dennis Fung and all the rest, and how the climate in LA at that time directly led to the verdict.

After the success and interest of Making a Murderer episodes, Glenn and Eric travel back to the 90s to discuss the physical evidence from the murders of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman and the trial of OJ Simpson.

Glenn Langenburg and Eric Ray discuss the most recent paper from the Noblis team (Bradford Ulery, Austin Hicklin, Maria Roberts, and JoAnn Buscaglia) from the data collected in the White Box study. Interexaminer variation of minutiae markup on latent fingerprints in Forensic Science International looks at how examiners mark points differently when looking at the same image. Clearer points tend to be marked by most examiners but unclear points or ambiguous features in clear areas can have wide variation in markup.

Glenn and Eric listened to the online recordings of the NIST Technical Colloquium Quantifying the Weight of Forensic Evidence. The presentations brought up lots of questions on how forensic scientists should be presenting evidence to juries and the court. Can juries understand complicated models or even nuanced levels of association? Is the search for a mathematical model to express the weight of evidence just a fool's errand?

Glenn and Eric take a look at the newly proposed draft documents from the Department of Justice. These documents seek to provide universal language for testimony and reports for multiple forensic disciplines. The good news is that there is nothing overly shocking or crazy in the latent print language. Examiners should provide comments to the DOJ, but the main content of the documents is in line with language from the past seven years from SWGFAST and the IAI. The link for the draft documents is https://www.justice.gov/dag/proposed-language-regarding-expert-testimony-and-lab-reports-forensic-science