The State of Forensic Science: An Interview with James Cizdziel

The American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) 2026 annual conference is set to take place this year from February 9–14^th, in New Orleans, Louisiana (1).

In the leadup to the AAFS conference, Spectroscopy sat down with James Cizdziel, a Professor and Chair of the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of Mississippi (2).

Cizdziel earned his BS from the State University of New York at Buffalo in 1991 and his PhD from the University of Nevada, Reno in 1998, with research interests spanning analytical, environmental, and forensic chemistry. His research group has developed new methods for studying microplastics, trace elements, mercury biogeochemistry, atmospheric sampling using UAVs, and forensic analysis of trace evidence, including from three-dimensional (3D)-printed firearms, and he has published more than 90 papers with funding from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Education (DOE), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the Department of Justice (DOJ) (2).

In this interview with Czidziel, he offers a preview of what he will be presenting at the AAFS conference and reflects on the state of forensic science in 2026.

Can you preview what you will be discussing/presenting at AAFS 2026?

The annual AAFS meeting is the leading conference in forensic science, and I’m honored to present my group’s research titled “Advancing Forensic Analyses with Chemical Imaging Microspectroscopy.” Chemical imaging spectroscopy, where spectroscopic properties of a sample are represented in a false color “chemical image”, excels at mapping the spatial distribution of chemicals in a sample. This provides powerful information that has a variety of applications, including in forensic science.

A few years ago, I was the principal investigator on an NSF MRI grant to acquire a Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR) microscope, the Bruker LUMOS II. The unit is equipped with two detectors, a focal plane array (FPA) detector and a Mercury-Cadmium-Telluride (MCT) point detector. The former is essentially a camera in the IR range with each pixel, about five-by-five microns in size, providing an independent spectrum. With thousands of spectra collected simultaneously the image consists of a huge amount of chemical information that can be used to, for example, look where a particular functional group occurs in a sample. In our research we use the technique to develop and optimize methods for analysis of trace evidence, including automobile paint chips, latent fingermarks, and ink on questioned documents.

Paint chips left a crime scene involving vehicles, such as a hit and run, can be crucial trace evidence. Paint is composed of several layers, typically the primer, basecoat, and clear coat. Each layer has its own chemical composition that can vary by vehicle make, model, year, and manufacturing plant. Thus, FT-IR spectral databases for vehicle paint systems, such as the paint data query (PDQ) run by the Royal Canadian Mountain Police, can aid law enforcement in narrowing search parameters for a suspect's vehicle.

Traditionally, these layers are separated by a razor and analyzed by transmission FT-IR spectroscopy. However, newer cars are increasingly made from lightweight plastic, and the paint on plastic tends to be thinner and much harder to separate into its component layers.

At the AAFS meeting, I’ll be presenting on the use of microspectroscopy to obtain spectra from individual layers of paint—without the need to physically separate them. Since the technique is entirely non-destructive, the original evidence can be fully preserved for subsequent analyses or additional testing. We've examined multiple paint chips using both micro-FTIR and optical-photothermal infrared (O-PTIR) spectroscopy. My presentation will explore these different analytical techniques and compare the optimized methods.

How do you apply spectroscopic techniques in your work in forensics?

My group focuses on micro-FTIR, but there's many spectroscopic techniques that can be applied toward forensic analyses. Our instrument has three modes of analysis: (1) transmission mode, which is the gold standard, in part, because many databases are based on transmission spectra, (2) reflection or transreflection mode, in which a thin sample is placed onto a reflective surface, such as a gold-coated slide, and the FT-encoded light is passed through the sample and reflected back to the detector (with some light being absorbed by the sample generating a spectrum that is characteristic of the sample), and (3) micro-attenuated total reflectance (ATR) where a crystal comes in contact with the sample and IR light penetrates the surface of the sample.

We are also using chemical imaging microspectroscopy for fingerprint analyses. The technique allows simultaneous visualization and chemical analysis. For example, C-H bond stretches from sebaceous residues can be used to map ridge characteristics and particulates can be spot analyzed to help identify exogenous (e.g. illicit) compounds. Most fingermark analysis nowadays is done chemically and the chemical reactions can damage DNA or destroy chemical trace evidence associated with the fingermark. Microspectroscopy examines a fingerprint nondestructively and can tie it directly to a particular compound, explosive, or drug. We are currently exploring the advantages and limitations of chemical imaging microspectroscopy in forensic fingerprint analysis using each of the three modes of analyses discussed earlier.

Lastly, we are using micro-ATR to examine ink directly on questioned documents where transmission and reflection modes do not work. Our instrument has a small germanium crystal, which can be placed on specific selected spots on a sample (that is, ink traces) to collect spectra. Statistical analyses, such as clustering, can be used to compare it to a database or known ink and provide the level of match. 

Can you walk us through your typical workflow when approaching a new case or analytical challenge?

I work on the academic side, so I’m not directly involved in forensic casework. However, when my group tackles a new analytical challenge or scientific question, our first step is always to determine what is already known. This usually involves conducting a thorough literature review and checking recent grants or awards to understand the current state-of-the-art.

Students should never hesitate to reach out directly to paper authors or principal investigators with questions, requests for clarification, or guidance. In my experience, most researchers are genuinely happy to discuss their work with students, and these conversations can save everyone significant time and effort.

Artificial intelligence tools can also be very helpful here—they often provide more detailed and insightful summaries of research papers than abstracts alone. Students can then collaborate with their advisors to refine and frame scientific questions that effectively direct the project.

From there, the focus shifts to resources. Can the work be done in-house using existing instrumentation, or will it require finding external collaborators? The overall workflow also depends on the project’s scope and the student level—graduate projects are more rigorous and typically require more effort than undergraduate projects.

Regardless of the specifics, at some point you simply have to begin analyzing samples and collecting data. Doing so often provides critical insights that naturally guide and refine the direction of the research. So students need to get the ball rolling so to speak.

What are the biggest technological or methodological advancements currently shaping the future of forensic science?

Generally speaking, forensic science is relatively slow to adopt new technologies, and there's good reason for that. Courts need well-validated techniques.

In the last decade, there's been a good push for forensic science to generate high-quality defendable data.With regard to technological advancements, some of the techniques I’ll mention have been around for some time but continue to be where things are heading. One is the continued development of portable or on-site analytical techniques, and that's often either spectroscopy-based or mass spectrometry with ambient ionization sources.

Many samples have a complex matrix making them challenging to analyze. Multi-dimensional chromatography is rapidly gaining favor as it can identify and quantify individual compounds in such samples. When coupled with high mass resolution, previously unknown compounds (such as cannabinoids) can be identified. The systems can also take advantage of the large dataset to generate fingerprints of, for example, environmental pollutants for environmental forensics.

AI is another important resource that will be increasingly used by forensic scientists. Forensic chemists, in particular, generate lots of data, but being human are unable to see all the patterns in it. There are now advanced statistical techniques that are becoming simpler to use, as long as the analyst knows their limitations. Importantly, these techniques can help reduce bias which in forensics is very important.

Finally, people are thinking about the cost and eco-friendliness of their work. We have to recognize how much energy is being used and how much waste is being generated. Do we really need to use methylene chloride as a solvent or are their other solvents that can be used instead?Green chemistry is coming to the forensic field. Techniques that minimize their environmental impact are going to be more in vogue, and, in my opinion, that is a good thing.

What are some of the challenges forensic scientists are currently facing across the industry?

The industry is facing several challenges. A perennial challenge the backlog of samples to be analyzed. There is also the issue of compensation. Forensic scientists and practitioners are not paid enough and as a result many promising students interested in forensics end up in other fields. Funding is key to address sample backlogs and to retain the best forensic scientists. I know that many forensic leaders recognizes these challenges and are working with their legislatures to help address funding gaps.

On the academic side, our program requires students to complete both a summer internship in a forensic crime laboratory and an independent forensic research project. Unfortunately, many students struggle to secure paid internships, which often restricts them to opportunities in their hometowns—sometimes at the expense of higher-quality experiences elsewhere.

Funding to support student internships directly from crime laboratories would benefit both the labs (by attracting stronger talent) and the students (by enabling access to better training opportunities). Once again, highlighting the broader community value of a well-funded crime laboratory can help strengthen the forensic field overall—by attracting and retaining higher-caliber students and chemists interested in forensic science.

What advice would you give to students or early-career scientists who want to enter the forensic field, especially regarding skills or experiences that are most valuable?

Students should make sure they truly master the fundamentals in their chemistry courses—even when those concepts don’t immediately seem relevant to forensic science. From the very beginning—in general chemistry and organic chemistry—many core principles become essential later on. Focusing on a strong foundational understanding really pays off in the long run. Ideally, instructors and professors can help by highlighting real-world applications, encouraging active learning and helping students make those connections early. The clearer the link students see between foundational concepts and their future work, the better prepared they will be.

I also believe that internship experience—whether paid or unpaid—is extremely valuable for students. It allows them to meet practicing forensic scientists, observe their day-to-day work, and gain firsthand insight into the field. This experience serves two key purposes: it can energize and excite students about forensic science while simultaneously helping them develop realistic expectations. To truly understand the realities of the profession, students need opportunities to interact directly with forensic practitioners and scientists—whether through internships or other forums such as workshops, seminars, or professional meetings like AAFS.

I’d also like to emphasize the critical importance of strong communication skills. Students will frequently need to deliver research presentations, participate in group discussions, and speak up confidently. These abilities are essential not only in forensic chemistry but throughout any scientific or professional career.

Finally, students should take a proactive approach to their education. They need to actively build a solid foundation—including strong laboratory skills and a genuine understanding of the instruments they’ll use—rather than treating them as “black boxes.” When students can troubleshoot effectively and demonstrate real comprehension of the equipment and methods, they position themselves to advance more quickly and stand out in the field.

Above all, they must recognize that they are their own best advocates. Being proactive in seeking opportunities, asking questions, and building their skills is essential to their long-term success.

This interview has been lightly edited for clarity.

References

1. American Academy of Forensic Sciences, AAFS 2026. AAFS.org. Available at: https://www.aafs.org/annual-conference (accessed 2026-01-23).
2. The University of Mississippi, James Cizdziel. Ole Miss. Available at: https://olemiss.edu/profiles/cizdziel.php (accessed 2026-01-23).