Texas Forensic Science Commission Self-Disclosures
Welcome to the Forensic Science Commission’s online portal for Complaint and Disclosure submissions. You may submit your complaint information via our downloadable Self-disclosure Form by mailing it to the Commission at 1700 North Congress, Suite 445, Austin, Texas 78701.
Texas law requires crime laboratories to self-disclose “professional negligence” and “professional misconduct” to the Commission. The term “crime laboratory” is defined in Article 38.35 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure to include “a public or private laboratory or other entity that conducts a forensic analysis subject to this article.”
“Professional negligence” is defined as: the forensic analyst or crime laboratory, through a material act or omission, negligently failed to follow the standard of practice that an ordinary forensic analyst or crime laboratory would have followed, and the negligent act or omission would substantially affect the integrity of the results of a forensic analysis. An at or omission was negligent if the forensic analyst or crime laboratory should have been but was not aware of an accepted standard of practice.
“Professional misconduct” is defined as: the forensic analyst or crime laboratory, through a material act or omission, deliberately failed to follow a standard of practice that an ordinary forensic analyst or crime laboratory would have followed, and the deliberate act or omission would substantially affect the integrity of the results of a forensic analysis. An act or omission was deliberate if the forensic analyst or crime laboratory was aware of and consciously disregarded an accepted standard of practice.
The Commission understands it may be difficult for a laboratory to assess whether a particular set of circumstances should be considered “professional negligence” or “professional misconduct.”
The Commission expects laboratories to alert the Commission to issues in the laboratory that are deemed significant and that may rise to the level of negligence or misconduct. The Commission will review the facts and circumstances and determine whether any further action is merited.
In preparation for the Commission’s quarterly meeting, staff drafts three memoranda to inform members regarding incoming communications as follows:
(1) Complaint/Disclosure Memo: The “Complaint/Disclosure Memo” outlines the facts of each self-disclosure received by staff. It also includes the staff recommendation for disposition. Disposition possibilities include:
- No further action (in cases where the laboratory’s response is sufficient);
- Investigate the self-disclosure and publish a report;
- Table the self-disclosure pending additional information; or
- Require further action by the laboratory as needed to fully address the issues raised in the self-disclosure.
(2) Accreditation Memo: Staff also provides a document to Commission members entitled “Accreditation Memo.” In this document, staff summarizes the various accreditation-related activities, such as the results of on-site assessments or surveillance visits. If staff believes an item submitted under (1) above does not meet the definition of items requiring self-disclosure, the item may be moved to the accreditation memo.
(3) Proficiency Monitoring Memo: The “Proficiency Monitoring Memo” summarizes all non-consensus proficiency monitoring results and categorizes them as follows: (1) method not used in casework; (2) answer outside acceptable/validated reporting limits; (3) test provider/manufacturing error; (4) clerical mistake by analyst/test participant with no impact on competency; (5) non-consensus results that may impact competency/proficiency of the analyst/test taker; (6) individual test taker not yet authorized for method or technology; and (7) DNA mixture interpretation. Most non-consensus PT results submitted as self-disclosures will be moved to this document for consideration by the Commission. Exceptions would be non-consensus results that raise questions about the integrity and reliability of forensic analysis performed by the laboratory or non-consensus results that involve professional misconduct. These are exceedingly rare.
The Commission’s statute allows it to withhold from public disclosure information submitted in the context of an investigation but only until the final report is released. Upon release of the final report, all information provided to the Commission is subject to disclosure.
IMPORTANT: If your disclosure involves a pending criminal matter(s), please be sure to indicate that on the form below, because certain legal exceptions may apply.