COMMENTARY: "When So-Called Real Science Becomes Junk Say no to science, but yes to punishment? Criminal justice has just taken a step backward," by Toni Messina, published by Above the Law on May 1, 2017. (Toni Messina has been practicing criminal defense law
since 1990, although during law school she spent one summer as an intern
in a large Boston law firm and realized quickly it wasn’t for her.
Prior to attending law school, she worked as a journalist from Rome,
Italy, reporting stories of international interest for CBS News and NPR)...(Above the Law (often abbreviated ATL) is a news website about law, law schools, and the legal profession.[1] Established in 2006, the site is owned and published by Breaking Media.[2] The site has been sourced by GQ, The American Lawyer, Forbes, Washingtonian, and Gawker, among others.[3][4][5][6][7] In 2008, it was listed as one of the ABA Journal's "100 Best Web Sites by Lawyers, for Lawyers.")
GIST: "Years
ago, lie detectors (polygraphs) were thought to be the cutting-edge
approach in determining whether someone was telling the truth. Now
science tells us that they are unreliable.
Polygraphs measure the physiological reaction to certain questions on the premise that all people react similarly when lying. Turns out this just isn’t true. Although lie detector results are not permitted into evidence in most courts, they were used for decades as the sine qua non to determine credibility. Still, many of my clients, right after they tell me they’re absolutely innocent, volunteer to take a polygraph test. I explain to them that while we could do that, the results would be inadmissible and therefore not dispositive. What was once thought to be science has now been debunked.........Now take bite-mark evidence........Let’s take DNA.........In addition to the questionable reliability of the science in the above forensic areas, another issue is the neutrality of who’s doing the testing. Are the labs free-standing or do they work hand-in-hand with the prosecutor or police? Take what happened recently in Massachusetts. Prosecutors agreed to throw out more than 20,000 drug convictions dating back to 2003 because the crime lab chemist admitted she either doctored or completely made up results on drug tests for years. People went away to jail based on tainted evidence. New York State’s Office of Chief Medical Examiner (OCME) claims proudly not to be associated with any prosecutor or police office. The prosecutor always elicits that the OCME witness does not work for the prosecutor or police but under the auspices of the Department of Health. No dog in the race, right? Wrong. The bulk of OCME’s work comes from the investigations they do for either the police or prosecutors and when they take the stand, just start cross-examining them and see how neutral they come off. Even the most benign question elicits a confrontation. This is why maintaining a neutral body such as the nonpartisan National Commission on Forensic Science, established to help the science of forensics remain independent and not beholden to a prosecutor’s office that looks for a win at any cost, is so important. However, in April, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the Commission would be disbanded. His announcement came on the heels of more tough-on-crime talk, threats to bring back harsher mandatory sentencing, beefing up police forces, and a renewed “war on drugs.” Say no to science, but yes to punishment? Criminal justice has just taken a step backward."
The entire story can be found at:
http://abovethelaw.com/2017/05/when-so-called-real-science-becomes-junk/
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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/
Polygraphs measure the physiological reaction to certain questions on the premise that all people react similarly when lying. Turns out this just isn’t true. Although lie detector results are not permitted into evidence in most courts, they were used for decades as the sine qua non to determine credibility. Still, many of my clients, right after they tell me they’re absolutely innocent, volunteer to take a polygraph test. I explain to them that while we could do that, the results would be inadmissible and therefore not dispositive. What was once thought to be science has now been debunked.........Now take bite-mark evidence........Let’s take DNA.........In addition to the questionable reliability of the science in the above forensic areas, another issue is the neutrality of who’s doing the testing. Are the labs free-standing or do they work hand-in-hand with the prosecutor or police? Take what happened recently in Massachusetts. Prosecutors agreed to throw out more than 20,000 drug convictions dating back to 2003 because the crime lab chemist admitted she either doctored or completely made up results on drug tests for years. People went away to jail based on tainted evidence. New York State’s Office of Chief Medical Examiner (OCME) claims proudly not to be associated with any prosecutor or police office. The prosecutor always elicits that the OCME witness does not work for the prosecutor or police but under the auspices of the Department of Health. No dog in the race, right? Wrong. The bulk of OCME’s work comes from the investigations they do for either the police or prosecutors and when they take the stand, just start cross-examining them and see how neutral they come off. Even the most benign question elicits a confrontation. This is why maintaining a neutral body such as the nonpartisan National Commission on Forensic Science, established to help the science of forensics remain independent and not beholden to a prosecutor’s office that looks for a win at any cost, is so important. However, in April, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the Commission would be disbanded. His announcement came on the heels of more tough-on-crime talk, threats to bring back harsher mandatory sentencing, beefing up police forces, and a renewed “war on drugs.” Say no to science, but yes to punishment? Criminal justice has just taken a step backward."
The entire story can be found at:
http://abovethelaw.com/2017/05/when-so-called-real-science-becomes-junk/
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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/
