Consulting Statistician/Senior Consulting Forensic Scientist
The Forensic Science Service, Birmingham, U.K. , 2001 – present
Senior Lecturer in Statistics
Department of Statistics, University of Auckland, New Zealand, 2005 – present
Senior Lecturer in Statistics
Department of Statistics, University of Waikato, New Zealand, 1999 – 2005
FORST Post-Doctoral Fellow
Program in Statistical Genetics, Department of Statistics, NCSU, 1997 – 1999
Assistant Lecturer
Department of Statistics, University of Auckland, New Zealand, 1994 – 1997

• Forensic Science Society
• American Statistical Association
• Biometric Society
• New Zealand Statistics Association
• R Foundation
• Royal Statistical Society

• Associate Editor for Science and Justice, the journal of the Forensic Science Society
• Associate Editor for ANZJS – the journal of the Statistical Society of Australia and New Zealand Statistics Association
• In addition, I have refereed articles for Law, Probability and Risk, the Journal of the Forensic Sciences, and the Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics.

Khangalani Zuma, co-supervised with Dr. Bill Bolstad. Graduated 2004 U. Waikato)
Paul Taylor, Rohan Maheswaran, co-supervised with Murray Jorgensen. Currently enrolled at University of Waikato.
Geva Maimon, co-supervised with Dr. Russell Steele. Currently enrolled at McGill University, Montreal, Canada.

Alec Zwart, graduated M.Sc. Statistics (1st class), University of Waikato 2001
Rachel Bennett, co-supervised with Dr. Nick Kim. Graduated M.Sc. Chemistry (1st class), University of Waikato 2002.
Geva Maimon, co-supervised with Dr. Russell Steele. Graduated M.Sc. and Dean’s Honours List, McGill University, Montreal Canada.

Doctor of Philosophy, University of Auckland, March 1997
Forensic applications of Bayesian inference to glass evidence
Master of Science (Honours), University of Auckland, Dept of Statistics, December 1993
Bachelor of Science, University of Auckland, December 1991

1. Department of Statistics, University of Waikato (March 2005). A MCMC method for resolving two-person mixtures.
2. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. (December, 2005). A MCMC method for resolving two-person mixtures.
3. ENFSI European Paint and Glass Working Group Workshop, Berlin, Germany (2005). A practical workshop on Bayesian glass evidence interpretation.
4. NITECRIME Workshop, Sitges, Spain (2005).  Statistical interpretation of multivariate trace evidence.
5. 6th Conference on Forensic Statistics, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ (2005). A MCMC method for resolving two-person mixtures.
6. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland. (November, 2004).  Some issues surrounding the interpretation of Low Copy Number (LCN) DNA evidence.
7. Joseph Bell Centre for Legal and Scientific Reasoning, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland. (June, 2004).  What is the effect of sampling error?.
8. Statistical Genetics Summer Institute, Program for Statistical Genetics, NCSU (June, 2004). Statistical genetics for forensic scientists, with Professor Bruce Weir (NCSU) and Dr John Buckleton.
9. 17th International Symposium on the Forensic Sciences, Wellington, New Zealand (March, 2004). Basic Statistics for Forensic Scientists Workshop.
10. 17th International Symposium on the Forensic Sciences, Wellington, New Zealand (March, 2004).How does the Highest Bayesian Posterior Density (HPD) Method work?
11. 54th Session of the International Institute of Statistics, Berlin, Germany (August, 2003) Modelling the distribution of recovered glass.
12. Institute of Environmental Science and Research Ltd., Auckland, (October, 2002).
13. What is the magnitude of the subpopulation effect?
14. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. (September, 2002). Interpreting DNA Evidence
15. 5th Conference on Forensic Statistics, Isla di San Servolo, Venice, Italy (August, 2002). What is the magnitude of the subpopulation effect?
16. Southern Statistical Genetics Summer Institute, Satellite workshop to the NZ Biometric Society meeting, Christchurch, NZ (December, 2001).Statistical genetics for forensic scientists, with Professor Bruce Weir, (NCSU) and Dr. Chris Basten (NCSU).
17. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. (November, 2000). Statistical Problems in Forensic Science
18. Department of Statistics, University of Waikato. (September, 2000). Statistical Problems in Forensic Science
19. U.K. Forensic Science Society and California Association of Criminalists Spring Meeting, Napa Valley, California, (April, 2000). Sampling error in DNA evidence
20. 4th Conference on Forensic Statistics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC (December, 1999). Sampling error in DNA evidence
21. Australasian Region Biometrics Society Meeting, Hobart, Tasmania (December, 1999). Are DNA profiles unique?
22. Discussion Panel on Legal Issues in DNA Forensics, McClean Virginia (June, 1999) with Dr. James F. Crow (Chairman of the NRC), Peter Neufeld (The Innocence Project), G. Woody Clarke (San Diego DA’s Office), Judge Ronald Reinstein (Maricopa County Superior Court) and Dr. Christopher Asplen (Director of the National Committee on the Future of DNA evidence)
23. ENAR Annual Meeting, Atlanta, Georgia. Are DNA profiles unique?
24. IBC International Conference on DNA Forensic Analysis, Annapolis, Maryland. Mixtures workshop, with Dr Peter Gill (Forensic Science Service, UK) and Dr Charles Brenner (Forensic Mathematician).
25. Statistical Genetics Summer Institute, Program for Statistical Genetics, NCSU. Statistical genetics for forensic scientists, with Professor Bruce Weir (NCSU) and Dr John Buckleton (ESR Forensics, New Zealand).
26. National Forensic Science Training Center, St. Petersburg, Florida. A divisive approach to the grouping problem in analysis of forensic glass evidence and Computer aided statistical analysis of forensic glass evidence.
27. FBI Symposium on Trace Evidence in Transition, San Antonio, Texas. A Bayesian approach to the interpretation of forensic glass evidence, poster presentation.
28. 3rd International Conference of Forensic Statistics, University of Edinburgh, Scotland. The grouping problem in forensic glass analysis: a divisive approach.
29. Institute of Police Science and Criminology, Lausanne, Switzerland. The statistical interpretation of forensic glass evidence.
30. SISC-96, Sydney, Australia. The grouping problem in forensic glass analysis: a divisive approach.
31. A.C. Aitken Centenary Conference, Dunedin, New Zealand. A divisive approach to the grouping problem in analysis of forensic glass evidence.
    

1. Buckleton, J., Curran, J.M. and Triggs, C.M. (2006) The effect of mutation on DNA match probabilities Submitted Forensic Science International, May 2006.
2. Curran, J.M. (2006) A Monte Carlo approach to two person mixture resolution. Submitted Forensic Science International, April 2006.
3. Aitken, C.G.G., Lucy, D., Zadora, G. and Curran, J.M. (2006). Evaluation of trace evidence for three-level multivariate data with the use of graphical models. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 50(10) 2571-2588.
4. Buckleton, J., Curran, J.M., and Walsh, S,J. (2006) How reliable is the sub-population model in DNA testimony?. Forensic Science International, 157(2-3) 144-148.
5. Gill, P.D., Kirkham, A. and Curran, J.M. (2006). The evaluation of multiple propositions in casework using LoComatioN, a probabilistic approach to analyse low-copy number DNA profiles. Accepted subject to minor revision Forensic Science International, April 2006.
6. Curran, J.M. and Buckleton, J. (2006). The appropriate use of subpopulation corrections for differences in endogamous communities. Accepted subject to minor revision, Forensic Science International, April 2006.
7. Neilson, K., Curran, J.M., Towns, D.R. and Jamieson, H. (2006). Habitat use of chevron skinks (Oligosoma homalonotum) on Great Barrier Island, New Zealand. In Press, New Zealand Journal of Ecology, May 2006.
8. Maimon, G, Steele, R.J. and Curran, J.M. (2005). Assessing spatial heterogeneity in the refractive index of float glass. Jurimetrics 46 31-51.
9. Triggs, C.M. and Curran, J.M. (2005). The sensitivity of the Bayesian HPD method to the choice of prior. Accepted subject to minor revision, Science and Justice, March 2006.
10. Walsh, S.J., Mitchell, R.J., Curran, J.M. and Buckleton, J.S. Substructure in the indigenous Australian population and its impact on DNA evidence interpretation. In press International Congress Series, September 2005.
11. Gill. P., Curran, J.M. and Elliot, K. (2005). A graphical (Bayes net) molecular model of the entire DNA STR process to aid interpretation. In press International Congress Series, September 2005.
12. Buckleton, J., Curran, J.M., and Walsh, S,J. (2005). R v Bropho:  Careful interpretation of DNA evidence is required for courtroom decision-making. In Press -  Australian Law Journal Australian Law Journal 79:709-722.
13. Curran, J.M. (2005). An introduction to Bayesian credible intervals for sampling error in DNA profiles. Law, Probability and Risk 4(1-2): 115-126.
14. Hicks, T., Schutz, F., Curran, J.M., and Triggs, C.M. (2005). A model for estimating the number of glass fragments transferred when breaking a pane: experiments with firearms and hammer. Science and Justice 45(2): 65-74.
15. Bill, M.R., Gill, P., Curran, J., Clayton, T., Pinchin, R., Healy, M. and Buckleton, J. (2005). PENDULUM- A guideline based approach to the interpretation of STR mixtures. Forensic Science International 148(2-3) 181-189.
16. Curran, J.M., Gill, P., and Bill, M.R. (2005) Interpretation of repeat measurement DNA evidence allowing for multiple contributors and population substructure. Forensic Science International, 148(1) 47-53.
17. Gill, P., Curran, J.M. and Elliot, K. (2005). A graphical simulation model of the entire DNA process associated with analysis of short tandem repeat loci. Nucleic Acids Research 33(2):632-643.
18. Lucy, D., Curran, J.M., Pirie, A. and, Gill, P. (2004). Sample sizes for haploid cells. Submitted Science and Justice, November 2004.
19. Buckleton, J. and Curran, J.M. (2004). Sampling Effects. Chapter in DNA Evidence Methods and Interpretation. eds. Buckleton, J. . CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
20. Buckleton, J. and Curran, J.M. (2004). Appendix 5.1 in Validating DNA databases. Chapter in DNA Evidence Methods and Interpretation. eds. Buckleton, J. . CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
21. Curran, J.M. Using the included R functions (2004). Appendix in Bayesian Statistics by Bolstad, W.M. John Wiley and Son Inc.
22. Newton, A.W.N., Curran, J.M., Triggs, C.M. and Buckleton, J. (2004). The consequences of potentially differing distributions of the refractive indices of glass fragments from control and recovered sources. Forensic Science International, 140: 185-193.
23. Walsh, S.J., Triggs, C.M.; Curran, J.M., Cullen, J.R. and Buckleton, J. (2003) Evidence in support of self-declaration as a sampling method for the formation of Sub-population DNA databases. Journal of Forensic Sciences 48(5) 1091-1093.
24. Curran, J.M. (2003) The statistical interpretation of forensic glass evidence. International Statistical Review 71(3) 497-520
25. Curran, J.M., Triggs, C.M and Buckleton, J.S. (2003) What is the magnitude of the subpopulation effect? Forensic Science International 135(1) 1-8;
26. Bennett, R.L., Curran, J.M., Kim, N.D., Coulson, S.A. and Newton, A. (2003) Spatial variation of refractive index in a pane of glass. Science and Justice, 43(2) 71-76.
27. Abaz , J., Walsh, S., Curran, J.M., Moss, D., Cullen, J., Bright, J., Crowe, G., Cockerton, S. Power, T.. (2002) Comparison of variables affecting the recovery of DNA from common drinking containers. Forensic Science International 126(3) 233-240.
28. Curran, J.M., Buckleton, J.S, Triggs, C.M. and Weir, B.S. (2002) Assessing uncertainty in DNA evidence caused by sampling effects. Science and Justice, 42(1) 29-37.
29. Buckleton, J.S., Triggs, C.M., and Curran, J.M. (2001) Detection of deviations from genetic equilibrium--a commentary on Budowle B et al. Population data on the thirteen CODIS core short tandem repeat loci in African Americans, US Caucasians, Hispanics, Bahamians, Jamaicans, and Trinidadians. J. Forensic Sci. 46(1) 198-200.
30. Curran, J.M., Hicks T. and Buckleton J.S. (2000). The forensic interpretation of glass evidence. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
31. Graham J., Curran J.M. and Weir B.S. (2000) Conditional genotypic probabilities for microsatellite loci Genetics 155: 1973-1980.
32. Curran, J.M. (2000) Expert witnesses in DNA cases New Zealand Law Journal April 2000 101-102.
33. Buckleton, J.S., Curran, J.M, and Basten, C.J. (2000) Evaluating the statistical significance of single band profiles in VNTR analyses  Science and Justice 40(1) 27-32.
34. Curran, J.M., Buckleton, J.S. and Triggs, C.M. (1999). Commentary on Koons RD, Buscaglia J. The forensic significance of glass composition and refractive index measurements. Journal of Forensic Sciences 44(4) 1324-1325.
35. Curran, J.M., Buckleton, J.S. and Triggs, C.M. (1999) The robustness of a continuous likelihood approach to Bayesian analysis of forensic glass evidence. Forensic Science International 104 93-101.
36. Curran, J.M., Robertson, B. and Vignaux, G.A. (1999). Genetic matches and the logic of the law. Genetica 105(2) 211-213.
37. Curran, J.M., Triggs, C.M., Weir, B.S. and Buckleton, J.S. (1999). The interpretation of DNA mixtures with population structure. Journal of Forensic Sciences 44(5), 987-995.
38. Curran, J.M. (1999). DNA and the limits of probabilities. The Forensic Panel Letter 3(9), 15-16.
39. Curran, J.M., Triggs, C.M. and Buckleton, J.S. (1998).  Sampling in forensic comparison problems. Science and Justice 38(2), 101-107.
40. Curran, J.M., Triggs, C.M., Buckleton, J.S. and Coulson, S. (1997).  Combining a continuous Bayesian approach with grouping information.  Forensic Science International 91, 181-96.
41. Curran, J.M., Triggs, C.M., Hicks-Champod, T., Buckleton, J.S. and Walsh, K.A.J. (1998).  Assessing transfer probabilities in a Bayesian interpretation of forensic glass evidence.  Science and Justice 38(1), 15-22.
42. Curran, J.M., Triggs, C.M., Almirall, J.R, Buckleton, J.S. and Walsh, K.A.J. (1997).  The interpretation of elemental composition measurements from forensic glass evidence.  Science and Justice 37(4), 241-4.
43. Curran, J.M., Triggs, C.M., Almirall, J.R, Buckleton, J.S. and Walsh, K.A.J. (1997).  The interpretation of elemental composition measurements from forensic glass evidence II.  Science and Justice 37(4), 245-9.
44. Triggs, C.M., Curran, J.M., Buckleton, J.S. and Walsh, K.A.J. (1997).  The grouping problem in forensic glass analysis: a divisive approach.  Forensic Science International 85:1-14.
45. Curran, J.M. (1995).  Statistical analysis of forensic glass evidence: a review.  Proceedings of the A.C. Aitken Centenary Conference, Dunedin 95-102.
46. Curran, J.M. (1994).  A method for adjusting for unit non-response.  Proceedings of the NZSA/NZOR Conference, Palmerston North 291-296.

1. Curran, J.M. A MCMC method for resolving two person mixtures
2. Buckleton, J., Curran, J.M. and Gill, P.D. (2005). Towards understanding the effect of uncertainty in the number of contributors to DNA stains

1. Curran, J.M. Modelling The distribution of recovered glass. Proceedings of the 54th Session of the International Statistical Institute, August 2003, Berlin, Germany.
2. Curran, J.M., Triggs, C.M., Buckleton, J.S. and Walsh, K.A.J.  A Bayesian approach to interpretation of forensic glass evidence.  Proceedings of the FBI Symposium on Trace Evidence in Transition, June 1996: San Antonio, Texas.
3. Curran, J.M.  The grouping problem in forensic glass analysis: a divisive approach. Proceedings of the Sydney International Congress on Statistics, July 1996: Sydney, Australia.

1. Harbison, S., Buckleton, J.S., Curran, J.M. and Weir, B.S. Interpretation of DNA evidence – ESR SOP. (1999) ESR, New Zealand.
2. Curran, J.M., Buckleton, J.S., Coulson, S., Gummer, A., Newton, A., Petricevich, A., Walsh, K.A.J., and Wevers, G. (1997).  The determination of the number of controls to choose in forensic glass analysis.  ESR Technical Report.
3. Triggs, C.M. and Curran, J.M. (1995).  A divisive approach to the grouping problem in forensic glass analysis.  Department of Statistics Technical Report Series STAT9502, University of Auckland, New Zealand.
4. Curran, J.M. (1994). A comparison of methods for adjusting for unit non-response. Department of Statistics Technical Report Series STAT9409, University of Auckland, New Zealand.

EXPERT WITNESS TESTIMONY & REPORTS

1. Regina vs. Mack – report (2005).
2. Regina vs. Kami – report, voire dire and Trial (2001)
3. AgriQuality vs Steve Purcell – Court appointed expert (interviews and report) (2001)
4. State of Florida vs. Gustavo Acosta – report + deposition (1999)
5. State of Florida vs. Danial and Rolando Bolaños – report (1999)
6. State of New Mexico vs. Rene Hernandez – Hernandez and Ricardo Martinez-Silva – report + testimony (1999)
7. State of Florida vs. Yvosvany Hernandez – report
8. State of Washington vs. Robert Lee Parker – report + testimony (1999)
9. Commonwealth of Virgina vs. Tecia Howard – defense report + testimony (1998)
10. State of North Carolina vs. Charles Williams – defense report (1998)
11. State of Florida vs. James Chesson – testimony (1998)
12. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania vs. Geraldo Jiminez  – report (1998)
13. United States Army vs. Kinney Russell – report (1998)
14. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania vs. Eugene Patterson – report (1998)
15. State of New York vs. Derrick Bonner (1998)
16. State of Washington vs. Kevin Clinkenbeard – report (1998)
17. State of Pennsylvania vs. Harry S. Harley (1998)
18. United States Army vs. Capt. Lewis T. Carter Jr. (1997)