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

Forensics Gone Wrong: When DNA Snares the Innocent (2016)

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 119 posts

Re: Forensics Gone Wrong: When DNA Snares the Innocent (2016)

#31

Post by jansan »

bradyd wrote: post #29
throw0101d wrote: post #13

See also: > The Phantom of Heilbronn, often alternatively referred to as the "Woman Without a Face", was a hypothesized unknown female serial killer whose existence was inferred from DNA evidence found at numerous crime scenes in Austria, France and Germany from 1993 to 2009. The six murders among these included that of police officer Michèle Kiesewetter, in Heilbronn, Germany on 25 April 2007. > The only connection…

There was also the case where a DNA test of a woman's children showed that they did not share any of her DNA. Social Services was threatening to take them away from her. When she had another child, the court ordered an officer to be present during the birth and collect DNA from both of them at that time. Even still the DNA "proved" she was not the mother. It was only after another similar case was discovered that the…

"Trust the science" always must be taken with a grain of salt.

Re: Forensics Gone Wrong: When DNA Snares the Innocent (2016)

#32

Post by [deleted] »

hiatus wrote: post #16
Lord-Jobo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main concern here is that the system is being nearly entirely bypassed. Literally 98% of cases plea out^1, bypassing the entire system of court procedure that is supposed to resolve these issues. 1: https://www.npr.org/2023/02/22/1158356619/plea-bargains-crim...

Submitting a plea is part of court procedure, and I'd also point out that the data you shared is for US federal cases, which have a notoriously high rate of conviction which could explain why people are quick to plea out. > In fiscal year 2022, only 290 of 71,954 defendants in federal criminal cases – about 0.4% – went to trial and were acquitted, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of the latest available st…

[deleted]

Re: Forensics Gone Wrong: When DNA Snares the Innocent (2016)

#33

Post by dylan604 »

picadores wrote: post #3
Zigurd wrote: post #2

Evidence handling and testing should not be under the control of police, or even prosecution. Incentives need to be aligned toward justice, not convictions.

Full Process Surveilance is needed to make evidence admissable. If it aint filmed the whole way, it aint valid.

I think the searches need to be done with full body camera back up to be sure. This would be an attempt at my partner planting evidence when arriving at the location for me to find. It also should find the situations where the person that planted the evidence from suggesting for someone else to look where he planted it. Of course, this does nothing for planting evidence before the search, but would hopefully stem the opportunity a bit.

Re: Forensics Gone Wrong: When DNA Snares the Innocent (2016)

#34

Post by giantg2 »

hiatus wrote: post #16
Lord-Jobo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main concern here is that the system is being nearly entirely bypassed. Literally 98% of cases plea out^1, bypassing the entire system of court procedure that is supposed to resolve these issues. 1: https://www.npr.org/2023/02/22/1158356619/plea-bargains-crim...

Submitting a plea is part of court procedure, and I'd also point out that the data you shared is for US federal cases, which have a notoriously high rate of conviction which could explain why people are quick to plea out. > In fiscal year 2022, only 290 of 71,954 defendants in federal criminal cases – about 0.4% – went to trial and were acquitted, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of the latest available st…

The data isn't much different in my state where 95%+ of criminal convictions end in a deal.

Re: Forensics Gone Wrong: When DNA Snares the Innocent (2016)

#36

Post by phpisthebest »

hiatus wrote: post #16
Lord-Jobo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main concern here is that the system is being nearly entirely bypassed. Literally 98% of cases plea out^1, bypassing the entire system of court procedure that is supposed to resolve these issues. 1: https://www.npr.org/2023/02/22/1158356619/plea-bargains-crim...

Submitting a plea is part of court procedure, and I'd also point out that the data you shared is for US federal cases, which have a notoriously high rate of conviction which could explain why people are quick to plea out. > In fiscal year 2022, only 290 of 71,954 defendants in federal criminal cases – about 0.4% – went to trial and were acquitted, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of the latest available st…

so there are 2 conclusions to draw from this

1. the federal law enforcement, and prosecutors are prefect humans that only ever go after the guilty

2. The system is sooo skewed in favor of the government that fighting them is pointless, likely due to immense corruption in the system it self

Since no humans are perfect, I think the stronger case is for #2 to be reality

Re: Forensics Gone Wrong: When DNA Snares the Innocent (2016)

#37

Post by dylan604 »

phpisthebest wrote: post #30
Lord-Jobo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main concern here is that the system is being nearly entirely bypassed. Literally 98% of cases plea out^1, bypassing the entire system of court procedure that is supposed to resolve these issues. 1: https://www.npr.org/2023/02/22/1158356619/plea-bargains-crim...

We need a rule to prevent plea deals that cross the 3 major punishment classifications (felony, misdemeanor, infraction) . i.e a prosecutor should not be allowed to plead out a felony to a misdemeanor, that should be by default viewed as unethically coercive

or the opposite where a simple misdemeanor gets trumped up to a felony so that the plea to a misdemeanor sounds like a good deal

Re: Forensics Gone Wrong: When DNA Snares the Innocent (2016)

#38

Post by jMyles »

jansan wrote: post #31
bradyd wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was also the case where a DNA test of a woman's children showed that they did not share any of her DNA. Social Services was threatening to take them away from her. When she had another child, the court ordered an officer to be present during the birth and collect DNA from both of them at that time. Even still the DNA "proved" she was not the mother. It was only after another similar case was discovered that the…

"Trust the science" always must be taken with a grain of salt.

"Trust the science", a refrain we of course heard over and over again used to justify questionable (and often coincidentally highly profitable) interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic, is already a contradiction in terms.

The entire basis for being so enamored with science, as so many of us are, is that it provides a method for establishing facts without needing trust.

Despite the noise to the contrary, we live in a highly literate age, and are a species filled with curiosity and compassion. There's no reason that scientific findings - especially those used to underwrite public policy - cannot be made easy to understand and straightforward to replicate.

Re: Forensics Gone Wrong: When DNA Snares the Innocent (2016)

#39

Post by hilux »

bradyd wrote: post #29
throw0101d wrote: post #13

See also: > The Phantom of Heilbronn, often alternatively referred to as the "Woman Without a Face", was a hypothesized unknown female serial killer whose existence was inferred from DNA evidence found at numerous crime scenes in Austria, France and Germany from 1993 to 2009. The six murders among these included that of police officer Michèle Kiesewetter, in Heilbronn, Germany on 25 April 2007. > The only connection…

There was also the case where a DNA test of a woman's children showed that they did not share any of her DNA. Social Services was threatening to take them away from her. When she had another child, the court ordered an officer to be present during the birth and collect DNA from both of them at that time. Even still the DNA "proved" she was not the mother. It was only after another similar case was discovered that the…

This is of my favorite science stories ever!

Re: Forensics Gone Wrong: When DNA Snares the Innocent (2016)

#40

Post by taneq »

sixothree wrote: post #9
opwieurposiu wrote: post #5

[flagged]

Nobody has any skin in the game, police, prosecutors, judges. Not even their reputation or ability to get hired somewhere is affected by putting innocent people in jail.

This was my experience after getting scammed last year. Supplier got hacked, scammer jumped into the middle of an email chain quoting previous emails etc. asking for a change of transfer details, I naively went along with it. They had the entire prior conversation and had even registered a lookalike domain. This would have stood out more ("herpaderp u shld hv checked the domain name lol") if companies didn't register random new domain names every time they feel like it.

Anyway, what I learned was that the bank doesn't give a fuck, it wasn't their money. The police don't give a fuck, it wasn't their money and solving fraud cases takes actual work. The insurance broker, who also doesn't give a fuck, hilariously told me I should have bought cybersecurity insurance, then admitted that the cyber insurance he suggested wouldn't have covered our case. Nobody cares.

Post reply on HN