Since the National Academy of Sciences released their report outlining paths for improving reliability, standards, and policies in the forensic sciences NAS (2009), there has been heightened interest in evaluating and improving the scientific validity within forensic science disciplines. Guyll et al. (2023) seek to evaluate the validity of forensic cartridge-case comparisons. However, they make a serious statistical error that leads to highly inflated claims about the probability that a cartridge case from a crime scene was fired from a reference gun, typically a gun found in the possession of a defendant. It is urgent to address this error since these claims, which are generally biased against defendants, are being presented by the prosecution in an ongoing homicide case where the defendant faces the possibility of a lengthy prison sentence (DC Superior Court, 2023).

翻译：自美国国家科学院发布关于改进法医学可靠性、标准及政策路径的报告NAS(2009)以来，评估与提升法医学学科科学有效性的关注度显著提升。Guyll等人(2023)试图评估法医弹壳比对的科学性，但其研究中存在严重统计错误，导致对犯罪现场弹壳源自参照枪支（通常为被告持有枪支）概率的论断被严重夸大。鉴于此类普遍不利于被告的论断，正被检方在被告面临长期监禁风险的未决谋杀案中作为呈堂证据（DC高等法院，2023年），纠正该错误具有紧迫性。