Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Meeting Rollup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Votes at a glance: Forensic Science Commission actions including disclosures, complaints, accreditation and licensing items
Summary
The commission handled a docket of disclosures, complaints, accreditation surveillance and licensing matters on Jan. 31, taking formal actions on a series of self‑disclosures and complaints, assigning investigative panels, adopting rules changes and approving licensing committee recommendations.
The Texas Forensic Science Commission on Jan. 31 considered a broad docket of laboratory self‑disclosures, complaints, accreditation items and licensing matters and took the following formal actions.
Key outcomes - Adopted minutes from the Oct. 25, 2024 meeting. - Approved staff recommendations of “no further action” on multiple laboratory self‑disclosures after staff review and corrective actions, including items 24.26 (forensic biology, Sherylological Research Institute), 24.47 and 24.48 (NMS Labs, two sections), 24.49 (Southwestern Forensic Sciences refrigerator event), 24.50 (Tarrant County ME refrigerator event), 24.51 (Jefferson County Regional Crime Lab reporting format), 24.52 (DPS breath‑alcohol calibration), 24.55 (Austin seized‑drugs data loss) and other similar disclosures where staff concluded corrective actions were sufficient. - Accepted several self‑disclosures for investigation or panel review: item 24.32 (DNA Reference Laboratory self‑disclosure; commission assigned a panel of Doctor Coble, Miss Zimac and Mister Daniel); item 25 101 (Harris County Institute of Forensic Science disclosure; accepted for staff investigation and report back). The commission also accepted other self‑disclosures for administrative staff investigation where appropriate. - Complaints: The commission accepted complaint 24.45 (filed by attorney Mark Thiesen against an analyst in DPS Houston toxicology) for investigation and formed an investigative panel (commissioners Parsons, Kerrigan and Drake). The commission tabled complaint 24.46 (Patrick Niles, document examination) pending a response and additional standards review; the commission dismissed complaint 24.58 (Kevin Schuette v. DPS Tyler) and dismissed Lucio Atkinson’s broad complaint for lack of factual support. Staff dismissals of items 2443, 2444 and 2453 were endorsed. - Licensing and rules: The Licensing Advisory Committee’s recommendations were adopted: the commission accepted the committee’s coursework determinations (denying two applicants and approving two others) and directed staff to propose rule changes to recognize certain TCOLE crime‑scene course versions taught by TCOLE‑certified instructors or commission‑approved subject‑matter experts. The commission also adopted an inactive license status rule (non‑disciplinary status) and encouraged rules to be drafted accordingly. - Accreditation and proficiency: The commission reviewed multiple accreditation surveillance documents and 23 proficiency non‑consensus reports; staff and commissioners resolved most items with no further action required at this meeting. - Firearms and working groups: The commission approved a uniform definition of “consultation” for firearms examiners and directed staff to distribute it to assessors. The commission also directed staff to establish a statewide Rapid DNA working group to recommend licensing criteria and partnership models (see separate article). - Investigative report adoption: The commission adopted an investigative report (DPS West region seized‑drugs sampling) finding fabrication of a sampling document; the commission approved staff’s recommended discipline (suspend license through expiration and bar reinstatement for two years).
Items carried or tabled for further review included several accreditation nonconformities that require additional staff and accreditor follow‑up and a complaint (24.46) that was tabled pending an analyst response and standards review.
Votes: Most motions were adopted by voice vote with the transcript recording unanimous or near‑unanimous “ayes” and no recorded roll‑call tallies in the minutes provided.
