Click here for a printable Table of Contents

1. 2023 Keynote Speaker
   Jon-Adrian “JJ” Velazquez, New York State Program Director of the Frederick Douglass Project
2. AFTE 2024
   Nicolette Roth, State of Alaska Department of Public Safety
3. How to Host AFTE
   Ally Anderson, Durham Police Department|
   Calissa Carper, West Virginia State Police
   Jessica Winn, California Department of Justice - Fresno
4. Deterioration of Gunshot Residue in Humid & Non-Humid Environments
   Sammi Castle, Alaska Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory
5. OSAC Update
   Andy Smith, San Francisco Police Department Crime Laboratory
   Erica Lawton, Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences - Mobile
6. Standards Development Activities in Firearm and Toolmark Examination
   Jennifer Floyd, Arkansas State Crime Laboratory
7. Technical Working Group on 3D Toolmark Technologies
   Erich Smith, Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory Division
   Michael Stocker, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
8. AFTE Journal Submissions: How to Work Around Common Issues with Publication
   Jennifer Gelston, Utah Bureau of Forensic Services
   Erica Lawton, Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences – Mobile
9. The AFTE Scholarship Fund (ASEF)
   Jim Hamby, International Forensic Science Laboratory and Training Centre
10. Glass Traces on Bullets as Additional Evidence for Shooting Reconstruction
    Shirly Montero, Arizona State University
11. Back to Front or Front to Back
    Deborah Gillis, Alaska Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory
12. The Forensic Examination of 3D Printed Components: Photopolymer Resin-Based Technologies
    Corey W. Scott, Terrorist Explosive Device Analytical Center of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory Division
13. Initial Observations of 3D-Printer Nozzle Marks
    Kirk Garrison, San Bernadino County Sheriff’s Department
14. Toolmark Source Determination of Fabricated 3D-Printed drop-in-auto-sears (DIASs) using Fussed Deposition Modeling (FDM) Desktop 3D-printers
    Douglas Halepaska, Federal Bureau of Investigation
15. Objective Comparisons of Printer Marks on 3D-Printed Firearm Components
    Thomas Brian Renegar, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
16. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Scientific Foundation Review of Forensic Firearm Examination: Update on Validation, Proficiency, Theory of Identification and Statistical Analysis
    Gregory S. Klees, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) Laboratory
    Steven P. Lund, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
17. Quantitative Comparison of Toolmarks Made by Tongue and Groove Pliers
    Eunah Joo, National Forensic Services of South Korea
18. AFTE Website Updates
    Jill Prather, Forensic Tool Mark Consultants, LLC
19. AFTE Machining and Subclass Guide
    Omar Felix, Unified Metropolitan Forensic Crime Lab
20. Examination of Consecutively Manufactured Metal Injection Molded Breech Face Inserts from the Smith & Wesson M&P Shield EZ M2.0 Pistol
    Joseph Vandenburgh, Nassau County Crime Laboratory
21. The Wound Ballistic Aspects of the Assassination of President Abraham Lincoln
    Luke Haag, Forensic Science Services, Inc.
22. Virtual Microscopy and Algorithm Analysis with Firearm Component Casts
    Zak Carr, Cadre Forensics
    Ryan Lilien, Cadre Forensics
23. The 1966 University of Texas Tower Shooting
    Edward E. Hueske, Forensic Training & Consulting, LLC
24. NIST Ballistics Database Testbed (NBDT): Basic Structure and Possible Usage
    John Song, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
25. Understanding the Firearms Examination Process: Presenting an Interactive Process Mapping Tool
    Melissa Taylor, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
26. Computer-Identified Best Non-Matches Between 10 Consecutively Manufactured 9mm Ruger Barrels
    Luke Haag, Forensic Science Services, Inc.
27. Firearm Mark Obliterations Documented in Afghanistan: A Case Study
    Bailey Henwood, Cranfield University
28. A .22LR Revolver Double Strike: The Case of an Unusual Toolmark
    Jonathan Charron, Sacramento District Attorney’s Laboratory of Forensic Services
29. Finite Element Modeling and Analysis of Breech Face Impressions
    James A. Hamilton, West Virginia University
30. The Trouble with Inconclusives in Firearms
    Lynn R. Garcia, Texas Forensic Science Commission
31. Progressive Marks Evaluated by Various Virtual Comparison Microscopy Systems
    Amanda Deal, St. Louis County Police Crime Lab
32. An Evaluation of the Equivalent Circle Circumference Method
    Michael G. Grisham, Mesa Police Department Forensic Services
33. Propellant Source and GSR Production
    Evan Thompson, Retired
    Luke Haag, Forensic Science Services, Inc.
34. Significance of Adoption of Toolmarks Examination on Bones and Cartilages
    Mohammad A. AlShamsi, Dubai Police
35. Quantitative Analysis of Breech Face and Firing Pin Impressions Based on High-Resolution Topography for Common Source Determination
    Danny Roberge, Forensic Technology
36. Diagnostic Tools for Automatic Cartridge Case Comparisons
    Joseph Zemmels, Iowa State University
37. Validity of Forensic Cartridge Case Comparison: A Field Study
    Max Guyll, Arizona State University
    Stephanie Madon, Arizona State University
38. Can Contextual Information Affect Verification Conclusions? [Non-Blind Verifications]
    Stephanie Madon, Arizona State University
    Max Guyll, Arizona State University
39. Effect of Subclass Characteristics on Congruent Matching Cells (CMC) Algorithm
    Veronica Franklin, West Virginia University
40. Differentiating Paint Samples from Overpainted Firearms Obliterations
    Bailey Henwood, Cranfield University
41. Why Tool Marks are Unique?
    Lior Nedivi, Independent Firearms Examiner & Crime Scene Examiner
42. Comparing Variability Within and Between Tools: An Empirically Trained Algorithm to Compare 3D Screwdriver Marks Using Angle of Attack, Direction of Tool Travel, and Repeated Measures
    Heike Hofmann, Iowa State University
43. Algorithmic Assessment of Striation Similarity Between Wire Cuts
    Yuhang Lin, Iowa State University
44. Panel Discussion: Implementation of 3D Technology
    Dawn LaPorte, Harris County (Texas) Institute of Forensic Science
    Kelly Woolard, Kern Regional Crime Laboratory
    Jared Ford, Arizona Department of Public Safety
    Michael Beddow, Phoenix Police Department
45. Panel Discussion: Implementation of 3D Technology
    Jordan Smith, The Intercept (Moderator)
    Peter Stout, Houston Forensic Science Center
    Colin Bellair, Travis County (Texas) District Attorney’s Office
    Kim Zeller, Houston Forensic Science Center
    Shaun Sylvester, Houston Police Department
    Anna Vasquez, Innocence Project of Texas
    Mike Ware, Innocence Project of Texas
    Scott Ruplinger, Travis County (Texas) Public Defender’s Office