1. American Academy of Forensic Sciences.The American Academy of Forensic Sciences Approves Position Statement in Response to the National Academy of Sciences' “Forensic Needs” Report: Academy News (2009).https://news.aafs.org/policy‐statements/the‐american‐academy‐of‐forensic‐sciences‐approves‐position‐statement‐in‐response‐to‐the‐national‐academy‐of‐sciences‐forensic‐needs‐report(accessed September 25 2018).
2. The Federal Rules of Evidence after sixteen years — the effect of “plain meaning” jurisprudence, the need for an advisory committee on the rules of evidence, and suggestions for selective revision of the rules;Becker E.R.;George Washington Law Review,1992
3. Daubert debunked: a history of legal retrogression and the need to reassess “scientific admissibility”;Billauer B.P.;Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy,2016
4. Brody J.E.(1993).Shadow of a doubt wipes out Bendectin.New York Times.http://www.nytimes.com/1983/06/19/weekinreview/shadow‐of‐doubt‐wipes‐out‐bendectin.html(accessed June 28 2017).
5. Does Fyre or Daubert matter? A study of scientific admissibility standards;Cheng E.K.;Virginia Law Review,2005