Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science
1–10 of 255 posts
Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science
#2[flagged]
Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science
#3Here is an uncomfortable truth. This man is in prison because of ableism.
This is why body language “experts” are grifters and charlatans.
This is why you shouldn’t convict people on a hunch, and why as a professional you don’t say shit you are unqualified to say.
Ableism kills.
Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science
#4[flagged]
Uggh. Look an armchair unqualified and outrage opinion by someone on Hacker News who has no idea what they are talking about.
Look up febrile seizure. Every parent know them. The recommendation by most doctors is to only bring in your child if their fever reaches 104, which he did.
You know what almost all new parents do? They bring their kids to the doctors at the slightest sign of trouble. You know what happens the first few times you do this? The doctors tell you to stop and they tell you you are over reacting.
If you were a parent, you’d know that.
Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science
#5Powerful article. What strikes me as a layman (non-lawyer, non-law enforcement), is how prevalent these methods of forensic science have become, without any solid scientific basis backing them up - such as peer reviewed studies with quantifiable evidence. You'd think that in order for the state to take the life of a human being, you'd need to prove it using means that are more thoroughly vetted than "[one doctor] who in 1971 suggested the cause might be violent shaking" (emphasis mine).
Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science
#6[flagged]
Lots of people deeply distrust big medical institutions. These aren't just shallow, weakly held beliefs based on a shrug, we're talking people willing to avoid medical care up until their own death. Sometimes, very smart, highly successful people who are admired by a great many.
What he did was massively negligent, but I'm not sure it's a good use of anyone's resources to keep him permanently locked up for 30+ years.
Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science
#7Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science
#8Powerful article. What strikes me as a layman (non-lawyer, non-law enforcement), is how prevalent these methods of forensic science have become, without any solid scientific basis backing them up - such as peer reviewed studies with quantifiable evidence. You'd think that in order for the state to take the life of a human being, you'd need to prove it using means that are more thoroughly vetted than "[one doctor] who…
IMHO our system of law cares more about precedent than almost anything else. The first case addressing a situation sets the bar, which is backwards. The most important decisions are made when we, collectively, know least about the topic at hand.
Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science
#9[flagged]
Lots of people deeply distrust big medical institutions. These aren't just shallow, weakly held beliefs based on a shrug, we're talking people willing to avoid medical care up until their own death. Sometimes, very smart, highly successful people who are admired by a great many. What he did was massively negligent, but I'm not sure it's a good use of anyone's resources to keep him permanently locked up for 30+ years.
Did their daughter have these sincerely held beliefs?
Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science
#10Powerful article. What strikes me as a layman (non-lawyer, non-law enforcement), is how prevalent these methods of forensic science have become, without any solid scientific basis backing them up - such as peer reviewed studies with quantifiable evidence. You'd think that in order for the state to take the life of a human being, you'd need to prove it using means that are more thoroughly vetted than "[one doctor] who…
I’m sure the dozens of TV shows don’t help this either. Law and Order is never wrong and their science and methods are flawless. Obviously I’m being sarcastic, but I think it clouds the jury’s thought process