I wonder if whoever is supplying evidence via tests should be forced to (blindly) apply the tests to people other than the defendant. If your test says some random sample is more likely match than I am, it's very weak evidence.
there are certainly a number of forensic fields which are garbage.
other portions are fine, and are effectively analytical chemistry applied to legal cases. are you aware of a lot of double blind studies in analytical chemistry? what would that even mean?
I gave an example at the top level comment. Apply the test (blind) to known innocent samples too, and see whether it implicates them.