To review for the folks of America,  Federal Rule of Evidence 702 was understood by the courts relative to Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals  that "specialized knowledge" was found to be consistent with sound expert witness methodology.  The strategic objectives follow:

• The techniques or theory used by an expert must be reproducibly tested  by increasing the effectiveness of science-based regulation (back to pre-1993 bills & laws this examiner authored),
• Peer review and publication of the techniques or theory is considered a priori for a scientific bases to be established,
• The method or techniques ratio of  potential for error must be an essential condition,
• Scientific acceptance as fact or degree of acceptance of the conclusions within the scientific community must be established.

During a pre-trial motion in limine or during a voir dire at trial,  the motion (voir dire) is sometimes referred to as a "Daubert hearing".  The judge, by examining the expert's methodology will make the determination on the "specialized knowledge" that allows the witness or physicians to testify.  Daubert's
effect, thus establishes scientific methodology as the criteria in the derivation of the opinion under scrutiny.  No longer will an expert or physician be able to hold that a degree of any nature be the determining factor.  Thus, scientific scrutiny and method are the determination of fact, not the opinion of any profession, professional person, school of thought, or prejudice therein.  Only good old American Scientific Basis of Fact must separate fiction from truth.

Thus, the National Commission on the future of DNA evidence is to provide the Attorney General and future Attorney Generals on the use of current and future DNA methods and applications relative to the criminal justice system: beginning at the crime scene throughout all proceedings to and including courtroom testimony.

  There are five basic issues specific to the Commission's mission which follow:

1. The use of DNA in post-conviction relief cases,
2. Legal concerns including Daubert challenges and the scope of discovery in DNA cases,   
3. Criteria for training and technical assistance for criminal justice professionals involved in the identification, collection and preservation of DNA evidence at the crime scene (see InfoJustice Solving a Murder Case: Part One),
4. Essential laboratory capabilities in the face of emerging technologies, and
5. The impact of future technological developments on the use of DNA in the criminal justice system.

Each and every topic for discovery will be the focus of in-depth analysis by separate working forums comprised of prominent professionals who will report back to the Commission.  The Mission of the Commission is to maximize the value of forensic scientific evidence such as DNA in the criminal justice system and disallow prejudice such as opinions by one who prescribes drugs, lotions, potions, decoctions or any professions' or technicians' biases in lieu of scientific fact.

For further information on working with Daubert challenges and science in the courtroom please contact the National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence at the National Institute of Justice.