tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post4711420823061429191..comments2024-03-28T00:11:33.489-04:00Comments on bensozia: Forensic Science is Still BogusJohnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01037215533094998996noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-7158237760163226792013-07-19T09:03:58.951-04:002013-07-19T09:03:58.951-04:00Yes, you're right that this is something the l...Yes, you're right that this is something the legal profession and police institutions should think hard about how to get right. It's absolutely infuriating that someone could be convicted because the hair analysis department didn't get the memo, or decided they could ignore it.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08993570411881726772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-58261023814994976772013-07-19T08:42:58.468-04:002013-07-19T08:42:58.468-04:00You are probably right about avoiding contradictio...You are probably right about avoiding contradictions wherever possible. I wish people would stop bringing up evolution and creationism in schools, for example, since no resolution seems possible.<br /><br />And of course most criminal cases are plea bargained. But I believe we routinely convict innocent men of felonies, and this is an issue that bothers me a great deal. I think our casual attitude toward forensic evidence really needs to be fixed -- science, after all, is something we are really good at, and we could clarify these issues for a billion dollars or so if we cared to. I am also bothered that there are no repercussions for prosecutors who commit serious offenses like concealing evidence from the defense; I think they should be fired and disbarred at minimum.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01037215533094998996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-75650288302256974572013-07-19T08:36:19.136-04:002013-07-19T08:36:19.136-04:00I would make two points. First, my understanding ...I would make two points. First, my understanding is only a small portion of criminal cases ever actually get to a jury's vote. So the huge numbers in our incarcerated population aren't based on the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard, but on the "this is what was worked out" standard. This may not be edifying, but the emphasis on such negotiations is built deeply into our legal system, which anyway seems to me more fundamentally at home in the law suit form of trial than in the truth-finding investigative form. I agree about Zimmerman, and I think the Martins should now sue his ass to kingdom come.<br /><br />Second, I'm wary of the injunction that a society should think hard about its contradictions. Yes, there are some issues--civil rights, gay marriage, etc.--where this process has been unavoidable and has worked out in ways I sympathize with. But in principle I think tussles over fundamental issues are not to be sought out where they aren't forced upon us. The usual result is ideological rigidity and civil conflict, followed eventually by exhausted compromise. I'd argue the current crisis in our politics derives in large part from certain conservatives thinking too hard about contradictions and deciding they have to get rid of them.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08993570411881726772noreply@blogger.com