Bite the Bullet

When their forensic test proved to be flawed, the FBI and the Justice Department fell short.

THE POST'S John Solomon and "60 Minutes" teamed up this week to report that hundreds of defendants have been convicted with the help of a forensics test considered so shoddy that the FBI stopped using it more than two years ago. Yet, shockingly and inexcusably, the agency failed to unequivocally alert defense lawyers and judges about the serious problems with this test.

The Post-"60 Minutes" investigation centered on comparative analysis of lead in bullets, a technique first used after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The test has been employed in thousands of cases since then to match bullet fragments from crime scenes with bullets owned by or in the possession of defendants. The theory, as espoused by the FBI, was that bullets produced from the same batch of lead would have unique chemical properties. Studies, including a definitive analysis by the National Academy of Sciences, have since proved this assumption false and concluded that the lead in bullets produced at different times can have virtually the same chemical properties, while bullets produced and packaged together can have different chemical characteristics.

Some in the FBI should be commended for raising a red flag, among them Dwight E. Adams, the former head of the FBI crime lab who put a stop to the FBI's use of bullet lead analysis. But the agency did not go far enough in alerting defense lawyers and judges of the technique's deficiencies. The FBI circulated a letter in September 2005 that notified lawyers that the agency planned to stop reliance on bullet lead analysis, even though the agency "still firmly supports the scientific foundation of" the test. Recipients of the letter could be forgiven if they didn't read this mealy-mouthed disclosure as a declaration of the deep-seated problems with the technique.

Of course, not every case in which bullet lead analysis was used will result in a new trial; other evidence, including eyewitness testimony, may prove strong enough to sustain a guilty verdict. But every case in which bullet lead analysis was admitted should be reviewed. The FBI and the Justice Department have promised to do just that -- and not a moment too soon, because some defendants are running out of time to appeal their convictions.

It is troubling that some law enforcement officials seem to have forgotten their legal and moral obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence that could help a defendant. This obligation not only ensures that innocent people are spared incarceration but also helps government to focus on capturing real perpetrators. Justice -- not victory -- should be the sole purpose of prosecutions. This principle should be foremost in the minds of FBI agents and Justice Department lawyers as they review these cases.