Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 255 posts

Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science

#11

Post by Retric »

harpooniker wrote: post #9
stuartjohnson12 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

First nobody said taking her to the hospital when he did was negligent he was convicted of shaken baby syndrome not delaying care.

Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science

#13

Post by wizerdrobe »

primer42 wrote: post #8
GlumWoodpecker wrote: post #5

Powerful 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.

As the saying goes, it’s a “legal” system rather than a Justice system.

So long as you follow arcane procedure and precedent, the deeper facts don’t matter and don’t get much respect from the system.

Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science

#14

Post by kyrra »

A version of this that just spells out the man's defense can be found on the opinion pages of WSJ: https://www.wsj.com/articles/texas-may-execute-a-man-based-o...

The news side also had a piece on this: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-debate-over-shaken-baby-syn...

Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science

#16

Post by quickthrower2 »

jncfhnb wrote: post #15

The most bonkers thing here to me is giving a man a death sentence because of a believed shaken baby death that he promptly took to the hospital.

That is what happens if you are innocent. An irony, because you wont make a deal so you can roll the dice on justice.

Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science

#17

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

GlumWoodpecker wrote: post #5

Powerful 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…

You sometimes get the stereotypical esoteric forensics experts, who tour the country saying they have some special ability to identify bites or toeprints or whatever. I pretty much agree with you there; their methods are unproven, there's very little reason to think they can actually do what they claim, judges simply shouldn't let them testify.

This case is harder. Medical questions about what happened to a victim are often highly relevant, and doctors are legitimate, credentialed experts qualified to speak on that topic. If they believe based on their training and experience that suchandsuch symptoms mean blunt force trauma, how could a random judge evaluate whether they have enough scientific backing to say that?

Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science

#18

Post by quickthrower2 »

kitanata wrote: post #3

Here 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.

Sexism and agism may have come into play too. “Creepy man, probably a peado” type thinking.

Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science

#19

Post by dmvdoug »

primer42 wrote: post #8
GlumWoodpecker wrote: post #5

Powerful 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.

And criminal law and procedure doesn’t care about precedent as much as it cares about finality. Which is really backwards.

Re: Texas death row inmate at mercy of supreme court, and junk science

#20

Post by unyttigfjelltol »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #12

I'm always bothered by how doctor's word is always taken as gospel. Anyone who's gone through the medical merry-go-round knows that doctors opinions on the same set of symptoms can be all over the place, some even outright idiotic.

Folks identified the dad as weird and in over his head, so untrustworthy and guilty. This isn't isolated, it's the norm. So, for 30 years or so the medical community had this voodoo DX to justify locking up social outcasts. And they seem completely OK with having done so. The DX sort of is not accepted anymore. But, the article describes a list of other voodoo sciences that demonstrate something remains very broken in the process for establishing facts, and we see time and time again that systems you'd think are driven by analytical rigor are really just a school popularity contests all grown up.
Post reply on HN