A nuclear weapons lab helped crack a serial-killer case
1–10 of 26 posts
Re: A nuclear weapons lab helped crack a serial-killer case
#2Fascinating read! Although calling a forensics lab within a nuclear weapons organization a "nuclear weapons lab" feels a bit cheeky.
Re: A nuclear weapons lab helped crack a serial-killer case
#3The link in this article to an analysis from the lab of highly enriched uranium from 1999 is a good read: https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:33057956
Re: A nuclear weapons lab helped crack a serial-killer case
#4This article cheerleads the policework, but I'm not convinced it's sound to introduce highly novel forensic techniques in court trials. So you validated your technique with a control sample from a pig; that's scientific rigor, that's sufficient for a scientific journal paper. I don't buy that's sufficient to put a person in prison for life.
One stray cross-contamination of lab equipment would invalidate everything. Repeat the work multiple times; but it's a systemic issue, and you repeat the same error.
- "The prosecution did not seek the death penalty in part because of the uncertainties of using a new scientific protocol, and the possibility of a long and expensive case as a result."
edit / tangent: (Then why'd he accept a plea deal for life? Represented by a public defender [0]. That's a striking resource asymmetry: million-dollar national lab work for the prosecution, 30 minutes of paper-skimming for the defense).
[0] https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2002-mar-13-mn-32560...
Re: A nuclear weapons lab helped crack a serial-killer case
#5> A team of around 22 scientists meets twice a day for such a test, said Williams, and works 10 to 14 hours a day.
They're saying it like they should be proud of that...
Re: A nuclear weapons lab helped crack a serial-killer case
#6> NUCLEAR WEAPONS laboratories don’t often help solve serial-killer cases.
Because mass murder is their specialty...
Re: A nuclear weapons lab helped crack a serial-killer case
#7This article cheerleads the policework, but I'm not convinced it's sound to introduce highly novel forensic techniques in court trials. So you validated your technique with a control sample from a pig; that's scientific rigor, that's sufficient for a scientific journal paper. I don't buy that's sufficient to put a person in prison for life. One stray cross-contamination of lab equipment would invalidate everything. R…
When also has someone retracted a real confession? It seems more likely that the police beat it out of him, then they leaned on this obscure lab to get the results they wanted. Or he’s just guilty and somehow thought confessing to multiple murders wasn’t going to effect his life that much.
Re: A nuclear weapons lab helped crack a serial-killer case
#8This article cheerleads the policework, but I'm not convinced it's sound to introduce highly novel forensic techniques in court trials. So you validated your technique with a control sample from a pig; that's scientific rigor, that's sufficient for a scientific journal paper. I don't buy that's sufficient to put a person in prison for life. One stray cross-contamination of lab equipment would invalidate everything. R…
if the Replication Crisis ever comes for criminal forensics there will be hell to pay.
Re: A nuclear weapons lab helped crack a serial-killer case
#9[deleted]
Re: A nuclear weapons lab helped crack a serial-killer case
#10This article cheerleads the policework, but I'm not convinced it's sound to introduce highly novel forensic techniques in court trials. So you validated your technique with a control sample from a pig; that's scientific rigor, that's sufficient for a scientific journal paper. I don't buy that's sufficient to put a person in prison for life. One stray cross-contamination of lab equipment would invalidate everything. R…
if the Replication Crisis ever comes for criminal forensics there will be hell to pay.