61–70 of 77 posts
96% FALSE POSITIVE RATE (falsely accused) for a non-DNA hair analysis???!!! I want to know more about its false negative rate (how many got away with it scot-free).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firstly, I'm sorry you went through the system and had to face these kinds of issues. I generally agree with you. The fact some of these citizens people were likely incorrectly executed, and others died in prison, based on bad science makes this depressing to read. However, I would factor in intent and knowledge on the part of lab workers and experts when demanding penalties for their action. If they intentionally li…
It's the explicit job of prosecutors to get guilty verdicts regardless of the defendant's guilt. This is the core of the US's adversarial justice system. (In the same way it is the defense attorney's job to get a not guilty ruling.) I think this should be changed, so that false convictions are treated with the same level of seriousness as police officers shooting unarmed civilians on camera. Patterns of prosecutorial…
Police officers in USA are almost never convicted of murder in these or any other circumstances.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/20/us/police-convicted-murder-ra...
If you or I lie to the court, it is perjury. When it is the FBI, who are granted an additional level of professional authority and trust in their testimony 'because reasons' (even though no testimony should automatically be elevated over other) it's just harmless 'errors made in statements by FBI examiners' as phrased in this article. Having gone through the system, it's all lies. Let's start with plea agreements. Yo…
Firstly, I'm sorry you went through the system and had to face these kinds of issues. I generally agree with you. The fact some of these citizens people were likely incorrectly executed, and others died in prison, based on bad science makes this depressing to read. However, I would factor in intent and knowledge on the part of lab workers and experts when demanding penalties for their action. If they intentionally li…
Would you be OK with a hospital having this level 'innocent mistake' rate? How about if 90% of a medicines studies had erroneous statements made by the same group of professionals?
Would you be OK with an amusement park having a 90% failure rate when they attest to the safety of their equipment?
Should not repeated failures that have a severe impact on people's lives be held to a higher standard than 'oops, my bad bro'? A doctor wouldn't get away with 90% erroneous statements, why do these professionals?
So, if this is used in a trial where I am on the jury, I'll assume it implies a 90% chance the evidence says the defendant is innocent, plus a 5 to 9.9% chance of a false positive with the underlying test. Got it. Moving on. Edit: I was being snarky but, on reflection, if they are falling back on hair analysis, it implies they have a piece of the guilty party's hair and the defendant's hair, but are not willing to pr…
> I'll assume it implies a 90% chance the evidence says the defendant is innocent Evidence isn't there to _prove_ anything, else we wouldn't need to ask anyone to be a juror. That's why we use "preponderance of evidence" and "beyond reasonable doubt" as our metric. It also assumes that all juries, once they see bite mark analysis, presume it's magic then simply decide they're going to convict at that moment and shut…
What do you think the point of making all those TV procedurals was? Jurors have been explicitly trained to care about "scientific evidence" to the exclusion of all else. Look at the Chauvin trial. Dude committed murder captured by a half dozen cameras, but the trial spent about 80% of time agonizing over nigh-irrelevant scientific evidence, because that's what the jury cares about.
If you or I lie to the court, it is perjury. When it is the FBI, who are granted an additional level of professional authority and trust in their testimony 'because reasons' (even though no testimony should automatically be elevated over other) it's just harmless 'errors made in statements by FBI examiners' as phrased in this article. Having gone through the system, it's all lies. Let's start with plea agreements. Yo…
> Either a crime warrants a 5 year sentence, or a 15 year sentence Then why is there a difference between first degree murder and second degree murder? Murder warrants a particular sentence, and circumstances should not matter? > But sentencing is based not on your crime The court is taking into consideration your behavior and your reticence over your own actions. Taking the plea deal shows reticence as it immediatel…
first degree and second degree are two different charges, which obviously should have two different sentences. What I am talking about is that the sentence for the same crime goes from 20 years to 5 if you waive your rights. How can the punishment for the same crime vary by that much? Why is there so much written about the trial tax?
How is it voluntary and not coerced to threat someone with 15 more years if they don't sign a plea? If I threaten to lock you in my basement for 15 years if you don't sign over your car's pink slip, is that coercion? But when it's the FULL WEIGHT OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT threatening me while I am 100% under their control and authority, somehow that is NOT coercion?
If you or I lie to the court, it is perjury. When it is the FBI, who are granted an additional level of professional authority and trust in their testimony 'because reasons' (even though no testimony should automatically be elevated over other) it's just harmless 'errors made in statements by FBI examiners' as phrased in this article. Having gone through the system, it's all lies. Let's start with plea agreements. Yo…
Any recommended reading?
Start reading cases and judgements. I think you will find discomfort in how things really work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any recommended reading?
https://www.lexisnexis.com/en-us/products/lexis.page Start reading cases and judgements. I think you will find discomfort in how things really work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
See, your job is to get accurate results because clients are paying to know if they have a problem or not. The FBI's job is to get convictions, so their lab's job is to create railroadable pseudo-evidence.
Mold lawsuits are very common; the money in mold testing is to always find mold. People who honestly want to know whether they have a problem are dwarfed in number by people who honestly want a certificate that says mold was found.
Ridiculous. So much of law enforcement and forensic "science" is just pretext or pseudoscientific supportive structure for good old gut feelings.
or- unless there's an opposing force, bad forensic science will drive out the good
If you or I lie to the court, it is perjury. When it is the FBI, who are granted an additional level of professional authority and trust in their testimony 'because reasons' (even though no testimony should automatically be elevated over other) it's just harmless 'errors made in statements by FBI examiners' as phrased in this article. Having gone through the system, it's all lies. Let's start with plea agreements. Yo…