forensics isn’t at all science. Cops, DAs and prison owners don’t want their BS ‘techniques’ reviewed because they know it doesn’t stand up to even flimsy scrutiny
The so called science used to convict the man is now known as junk science even by prosecutors.:
"Broadwater was nonetheless tried and convicted in 1982 based largely on two pieces of evidence. On the witness stand, Sebold identified him as her rapist. And an expert said microscopic hair analysis had tied Broadwater to the crime. That type of analysis has since been deemed junk science by the U.S. Department of Justice.
“Sprinkle some junk science onto a faulty identification, and it’s the perfect recipe for a wrongful conviction,” Broadwater's attorney, David Hammond, told the Post-Standard."