Too often the forensic office is friends with and/or pressured by the police or DA to get results. Especially in election years or for high profile casrs.
Not even a little. The lab I work in doesn't care one whit about PD or DA "pressure", whatever you think that is. We do what they order, just like we do whatever the defense (or even the defendants themselves, when they choose to defend themselves) orders, but only so far as doing the tests they want. Our methods determine our results, not anything ridiculous like "politics" or "pressure".
Forensic science should be done behind a blind. I.E., with no name or trackable case number attached to the evidence, by a lab in an entirely different physical area than the case.
Anonymous methods of communication can be devised to pass requests back and forth.
God, what a nightmare that would be. Can you imagine the chain of custody issues that would result from evidence criss-crossing the country, especially when a lot of evidence has a limited turnaround time in order to meet constitutional requirements for a speedy trial. The OJ trial was decided, not because of any forensic science "problems", but because the chain of custody had holes in it, and that was just within LAPD and the LAPD's crime lab; imagine the problems with evidence criss-crossing the country with "annonymizing" tracking numbers and the like; you'd never be able to convict anyone of anything.
Not to mention the enormous expense of building a secure courier system the size of UPS to package, transport, and store evidence travelling all over the place like that.
In addition, whenever possible the work should be peer reviewed as in redone, again anoymously by another lab.
We do better than that: evidence is always made available for the defense, whenever it is asked for, to be sent to whatever outside, independent labs they want to use. This happens dozens of times a year, and only once has the outside lab come up with anything that contradicts what the crime lab itself came up with (it turned out that the unaccredited outside lab was at fault)
As for anonymously re-analyzing everything... how much money do you think is out there for redundant tests? The LAPD alone does 15,000 cases a year, just in the narcotics section; it would require the full-time work of over a dozen highly trained professionals, in a second state of the art lab, to redo all their work. That's millions of dollars a year, spent in what will be a futile effort to find fault with the first set of analyses, which will then proceed to be denegrated for also not being "independent" enough for you.
We spend millions locking up people for joints, this is peoples entire lives that are ruined by mistakes, over zealouness, and -gasp- corruption.
But, lile security theater, it is not about safety, but the illusion of safety. Oh, and raking in tax dollars for a job done wrong.
Now you're just galloping on to incresingly irrelevant points. Corruption and over-zealousness on the part of the police has nothing to do with forensic science labs, nor does the war on marijuana, even if it is an assinine waste of time.