Multimedia Listing

Alix McLearen, Ph.D., acting assistant director, Reentry Services Division, Federal Bureau of Prisons and John Wetzel, secretary of corrections, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections discuss programs and services that their agencies offer to help individuals overcome the challenges encountered when leaving incarceration. These various programs and services address the individuals’ needs in areas such as physical and mental health, addiction, education, vocation, and life skills. 

This video provides and international perspective on civil disturbance units. 
Dr. Ben Burger, Chief, Unterstützungskommando, Dachau, Germany, discusses how his unit’s response to civil disturbances compares to his American counterparts and the approaches that contribute to his unit’s success. 
 

How do you use data and science to measure program success?
John Wetzel, secretary of corrections, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and Grant Duwe, Ph.D., director of research and evaluation, Minnesota Department of Corrections explain how their agencies evaluate programs using data and science. Duwe details how the most effective programs provided by the Minnesota DOC have been those that focus on known risk factors for recidivism. 

NIJ Conference
Interview

June 2010

Connie Beck, Associate Professor, University of Arizona, Tucson

NIJ Conference
nijconf2010-usbeck Interview

June 2010

Kyle Usbeck, Lead Software Engineer, Drakontas LLC.

NIJ Conference
Plenary Panel
June 2010

Moderator: Kristina Rose, Acting Director, National Institute of Justice

Panelists:

Throughout the Probabilistic Genotyping of Evidentiary DNA Typing Results virtual workshop series, we have reviewed aspects of DNA mixture interpretation and have seen that probabilistic genotyping (PG) software can serve as a tool to assist the DNA Examiner in identifying possible genotype sets within a mixture and then calculating a likelihood ratio (LR). Approaches to modeling were shared by the developers of different PG software programs, followed by examples of internal validation studies and results.

NIJ Conference Interview

June 2010

NIJ Conference
nijconf2010-deprince Interview
June 2010
Anne DePrince, Associate Professor, University of Denver

NIJ Conference
Interview

June 2010

Greg Ridgeway, Director, Safety and Justice and Center on Quality Policing, RAND Corp.

NIJ Conference
Interview

June 2010

Dan O'Connell, Associate Professor, University of Delaware

Numerous states and hundreds of municipalities have laws restricting the location of a convicted sex offender's residence. Little is known about the effectiveness of these restrictions. Do they keep children safer or give a false sense of safety? Some people suggest these laws are driven by media attention to a few cases. Others believe they are not grounded in research.

NIJ Conference

Interview

June 2011

Debra Stoe, Physical Scientist, National Institute of Justice
Tom Sharkey, National Bomb Squad Advisory Committee
Ed Bailor, U.S. Capitol Police (ret.).

NIJ Conference

Interview

June 2009

Pamela Lattimore, Scientist, RTI International

NIJ Conference
Interview

June 2010

Warren Harrison, Professor, Portland State University

Patrick Gallagher, Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology
NIJ Conference

June 2011

Mario Maciel, Parks, Recreation and Neighborhood Services, San Jose, Calif.

NIJ Conference

June 2011

Practitioners from across the criminal justice system speak to the impact of NIJ's Solving Cold Cases with DNA grant program.

Practitioners from across the criminal justice system speak to the importance of cold case units and the impact they can have.

At this Research for the Real World seminar, NIJ brought together law enforcement practitioners and leading researchers in the field of stress to discuss the current research evidence and practical benefits of targeted stress-management interventions and how they can promote officer mental wellness.

Has a person of interest contributed DNA to a mixture obtained from evidence? Is that DNA associated with a crime? Both are questions that cannot be answered with absolute certainty. This module of the Probabilistic Genotyping of Evidentiary DNA Typing Results workshop series addresses the uncertainty and limitations of probabilistic genotyping systems that are used to calculate likelihood ratios and infer genotype sets from DNA typing results.

Biological modeling, statistical theory, and the computer processing of probabilistic genotyping systems are based on long- standing principles, yet their usage in U.S. courts has been limited to the past few years. This module of the Probabilistic Genotyping of Evidentiary DNA Typing Results web series addresses topics relevant to the admissibility of probabilistic genotyping results and the presentation of results in criminal proceedings. Various decisions related to probabilistic genotyping will be summarized from a legal perspective.

Historically, the predominant means of assigning statistical weight to many DNA mixtures in the U.S. has been the combined probability of inclusion, or CPI. Accordingly, many forensic DNA analysts, as well as attorneys and judges, are well-versed in the CPI as a match probability. In the fifth module of this workshop series devoted to probabilistic genotyping, the presenters will help DNA analysts and legal professionals understand degrees of statistical weight and properly communicate likelihood ratios and their meaning.

The Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM) and other bodies have published guidelines that specify empirical studies to be performed to assess reliability, identify limitations and develop suitable usage conditions for probabilistic genotyping systems.