Aronson, Jay ( 2007) Genetic Witness: Science, Law, and Controversy in the Making of DNA Profiling (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press).
2.
Ashmore, Malcolm ( 1989) The Reflexive Thesis: Wrighting Sociology of Scientific Knowledge (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
3.
Bennett, Lance & Martha Feldman ( 1981) Reconstructing Reality in the Courtroom ( New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press).
4.
Bloor, David ( 1976) Knowledge and Social Imagery (London : Routledge & Kegan Paul).
5.
Calabresi, Guido ( 1970) The Cost of Accidents: A Legal and Economic Analysis ( New Haven: Yale University Press).
6.
Caudill, David & Lash LaRue ( 2006) No Magic Wand: The Idealization of Science in Law ( Lanham, MA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc ).
7.
Cheng, Edward & Albert Yoon ( 2005) ‘Does Frye or Daubert Matter? A Study of Scientific Admissibility Standards’, Virginia Law Review91: 471-513.
8.
Cole, Simon ( 2009) ‘A Cautionary Tale about Cautionary Tales about Intervention’, Organization16: 121-41.
9.
Collins, H.M. ( 1985) Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice (London &Beverly Hills: Sage Publications).
10.
Daston, Lorraine & Peter Galison ( 2007) Objectivity (Boston: Zone Books).
11.
Davis, Josh & Tim Valentine ( 2009) ‘CCTV on Trial: Matching Video Images with the Defendant in the Dock’, Applied Cognitive Psychology23: 482-505.
12.
Dixon, Lloyd & Brian Gill ( 2002) ‘Changes in the Standards for Admitting Expert Evidence in Federal Civil Cases Since the Daubert Decision’, Psychology, Public Policy & Law8: 251-308.
13.
Dror, Itiel, David Charlton & Ailsa Peron ( 2006) ‘Contextual Information Renders Experts Vulnerable to Making Erroneous Identifications’, Forensic Science International156: 74-78.
14.
Edmond, Gary ( 1998) ‘Science in Court: Negotiating the Meaning of a "Scientific" Experiment During a Murder Trial and Some Limits to Legal Deconstruction for the Public Understanding of Law and Science’, Sydney Law Review20: 361-401.
15.
Edmond, Gary ( 2002) ‘Constructing Miscarriages of Justice: Misunderstanding the Role of Scientific Evidence in High Profile Criminal Appeals’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies22: 53-89.
16.
Edmond, Gary ( 2008) ‘Pathological Science? Demonstrable Reliability and Expert Pathology Evidence’, in K. Roach (ed.), Pediatric Forensic Pathology and the Justice System (Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario): 96-149.
17.
Edmond, Gary, Kath Biber, Richard Kemp & Glenn Porter ( 2009) ‘Law’s Looking Glass: Expert Identification Evidence Derived from Photographic and Video Images’, Current Issues in Criminal Justice20: 337-77.
18.
Edmond, Gary & David Mercer ( 1999) ‘Juggling Science: From Polemic to Pastiche’ , Social Epistemology13: 215-33.
19.
Edmond, Gary & Mehera San Roque(2009) ‘Quasi-justice: Ad hoc Expertise and Identification Evidence’ , Criminal Law Journal33: 8-33.
20.
Faigman, David L. ( 1999) Legal Alchemy: The Use and Misuse of Science in the Law (New York: W.H. Freeman).
21.
Findley, Keith ( 2008) ‘Innocents at Risk: Adversary Imbalance, Forensic Science, and the Search for the Truth’, Seton Hall Law Review38: 893-974.
22.
Garrett, Brandon & Peter Neufeld ( 2009) ‘Invalid Forensic Science Testimony and Wrongful Convictions’, Virginia Law Review95: 1-97.
23.
Groscup, Jennifer L., Steven D. Penrod, Christina A. Studebaker, Matthew T. Huss & Kevin M. O’Neill ( 2002) ‘The Effects of Daubert on the Admissibility of Expert Testimony in State and Federal Criminal Cases’, Psychology, Public Policy & Law8: 339-72.
24.
Harris, Rebecca C. ( 2008) Black Robes, White Coats: The Puzzle of Judicial Policymaking and Scientific Evidence (New Jersey: Rutgers University Press).
25.
Jasanoff, Sheila ( 1995) Science at the Bar: Law, Science, and Technology in America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
26.
Jasanoff, Sheila (ed.) (2004) States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and Social Order ( New York: Routledge).
27.
Jasanoff, Sheila ( 2008) ‘Making Order: Law and Science in Action’ , in E. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch & J. Wajcman (eds), The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd edition ( Cambridge, MA: MIT Press): 761-86.
28.
Knorr Cetina, Karin ( 1981) The Manufacture of Knowledge (Oxford : Pergamon).
29.
Latour, Bruno & Steve Woolgar ( 1979) Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts (Los Angeles: Sage Publications ).
30.
Lynch, Michael ( 2004) ‘"Science Above All Else": The Inversion of Credibility between Forensic DNA Profiling and Fingerprint Evidence’, in G. Edmond (ed.), Expertise in Regulation and Law (Aldershot: Ashgate): 121-35.
31.
Lynch, Michael & Simon Cole ( 2005) ‘Science and Technology Studies on Trial: Dilemmas of Expertise’, Social Studies of Science35: 269-311.
32.
Lynch, Michael, Simon A. Cole, Ruth McNally & Kathleen Jordan ( 2008) Truth Machine: The Contentious History of DNA Evidence (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
33.
Lynch, Michael & Sheila Jasanoff (guest eds) (1998) ‘Contested Identities: Science, Law, and Forensic Practice’, Special Issue of Social Studies of Science28(5/6).
34.
National Research Council (2009) Strengthening the Forensic Sciences in the United States: A Path Forward ( Washington, DC: The National Academies Press).
35.
Porter, Glenn ( 2008) ‘CCTV Images as Evidence’, Australian Journal of Forensic Science41: 1-15.
36.
Porter, Theodore ( 1995) Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
37.
Risinger, D. Michael ( 2001) ‘Navigating Expert Reliability: Are Criminal Standards of Certainty being Left on the Dock?’, Albany Law Review64: 99-152.
38.
Saks, Michael & Jonathan Koehler ( 2005) ‘The Coming Paradigm Shift in Forensic Identification Science’, Science309: 892-95.
39.
Saks, Michael, Elise Porter & David Faigman ( 1994) ‘Check Your Crystal Ball at the Courthouse Door, Please: Exploring the Past, Understanding the Present, and Worrying About the Future of Scientific Evidence’, Cardozo Law Review15: 1799-835.
40.
Schwartz, Louis-Georges ( 2009) Mechanical Witness: A History of Motion Picture Evidence in US Courts (New York: Oxford University Press).
41.
Volokh, Alexander ( 1997) ‘n Guilty Men’, University of Pennsylvania Law Review146: 173-211.
42.
Wynne, Brian ( 1989) ‘Establishing the Rules of Laws: Constructing Expert Authority’, in R. Smith & B. Wynne (eds), Expert Evidence: Interpreting Science in the Law (Routledge: London): 23-55.