Both law and science pursue truth and involve formalised exercises in organised distrust. These similarities offer fertile ground for considering how the pursuit of factual accuracy in law and science is impaired by similar forces. For example, in both science and law, transparency prevents organised distrust from working well. In science: researchers can run many statistical tests and select the most favourable results to report; studies that result in null findings are hard to publish; and errors in the published record are challenging to address. In law: it’s often hard to know what tests an expert performed and didn’t report; swaths of the investigatory process are unreported by police; and multiple experts might be consulted by an adversarial party before one is selected for testimony. These and other similarities offer crucial opportunities for law and science to learn from each other’s innovations. In this group, we will discuss these intersections between law and science, with the ultimate aim of producing a research agenda. We organized a discussion group at AIMOS 2022. The slides are in project files. The meeting link is https://anu.zoom.us/j/87941056958?pwd=Zjd6cjJ5RFd0ZHpOZ2w3eEJMWHJTZz09