Anna Sandiford

Dr Anna Sandiford is a forensic science consultant and expert witness. She is also Director of The Forensic Group Ltd, a scientific consultancy based in New Zealand with an extensive national and international networks of experts upon whom to call. She has been been involved with forensic science since 1998 in both the UK and New Zealand and has assisted with cases throughout New Zealand, the UK, Channel Islands and Cayman Islands. Her areas of forensic expertise include alcohol, drugs, drug driving, drug traces, footwear/sockprints, glass and pollen (palynology). She is one of a handful of forensic pollen experts worldwide and is involved with an international team that provides environmental forensic services to police and intelligence agencies, particularly in the UK.

The CSI Effect in New Zealand: what is it? - Forensic Scientist

Sep 30, 2011

I have been asked to provide comment on the CSI effect in New Zealand. The request came from a Forensic Science student and so I started to pen (type) my reply. However, it got the better of me and so I thought I’d just add it as a blog post as well. My opinion of the CSI Effect in NZ is not too dissimilar to that of the effect overseas. We’re not at the stage where we’re having to screen juries to see if they watch programmes like CSI, like they do in the USA. At the end of the day, juries are just members of the public and members of the public are not as gullible as the perception seems to be. In particular, politicians regularly underestimate how savvy the public is, and juries come from that same pool … Read More

Scientific grammer [sic] - Forensic Scientist

Sep 30, 2011

I loathe mispellings and bad grammar.  Many scientific papers have excellent scientific results and interpretations to report but if someone puts a preposition at the end of a sentence, my estimation of them lowers just a tiny fraction.  I know I am also guilty of it but I try to minimise the problem. People have their own foibles about grammar, sentence structure and spelling.  Many people can’t distinguish between they’re, their and there.  Your and you’re is another pair destined for sufferance…and right there is another problem – the plural.  Is it correct to say “Your and you’re is another pair” or should it be “Your and you’re are another pair”?  I was taught that it would be the former; it would be a singular because there is only one pair, even if the pair refers, by definition, to two … Read More

Freaking people out with tales of gore - Forensic Scientist

Sep 01, 2011

In the third of the series, the next questions to be answered from the blogpost a-forensic-scientist-tells-it-like-it-is-free-book-to-give-away, these ones from EvilTwit: Do you find yourself getting excited about facets of the case that would normally freak other people out (and editing these sentiments out of conversations)? Short answer: yes. Long answer: In the spirit of the [...]

’Police armed with keyboards can be as effective as those with truncheons’ — discuss - Forensic Scientist

Aug 23, 2011

Regardless of what people think about Big Brother and the nanny state, there’s no denying that in a country fed up with troublemakers, England has used the myriad of CCTV cameras to deal to rioters.  The Breat British Public have, of course, added their own version of looters by photoshopping them: PhotoShop Looters.   These are [...]