GIST: "Of course, the ‘Innocence’ movement would not be what it is today without the advent of forensic DNA profiling, leading to the exoneration of many, and proving without doubt their innocence. Yet, while forensic science is acclaimed in the media, it has a blemished history in reality. Many infamous miscarriages of justice have had at their core, scientific evidence that was not disclosed, flawed, or misrepresented in court. This is not to assert that ‘scientific’ methods of identifying criminal perpetrators in particular, have not advanced dramatically. Lessening reliance upon inherently flawed eyewitness or other evidence has undoubtedly saved many innocent individuals from investigation or possibly, wrongful conviction. It is simply to concede that such ‘scientific’ methods of identification are not infallible. This is a focal point of my research, the contribution of ‘science’ to (in)justice. As such, there are a wealth of ‘forensic’ blogs to keep up with if one is to keep anywhere near ‘on top’ of developments in forensics."
The entire post can be found at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE:
The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html
Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.
