Professor Ruth Morgan examines why forensic evidence is rarely as objective or conclusive as it appears. She explores how context, bias, and human interpretation influence investigations—and what this means when scientific evidence reaches the courtroom.
The conversation also considers how AI could support forensic experts through pattern recognition and connected evidence, while potentially increasing error and misplaced confidence. It reveals why the future of justice will depend on combining technology with expertise, critical thinking, and a greater willingness to acknowledge uncertainty.
