You Got a Jury That Was Blinded By “Science.”
We need to normalize authorities admitting to their own wrongdoing.
Today, we live in a world where people that control our government are the worst human beings among us. Accordingly, they will attempt to “trick” lay person jury’s into illogical verdicts with nothing more than an authority figures hubris at the heart of their assertions. When Law Enforcement exercises an "I dont like this person analysis" the fabric of society will fail. Scientific evidence is nothing new to the American Judiciary. Unfortunately, the authorities have attempted and through citizen trust, made 1 + 1 = 82 milloin. Subsequently, if you have been charged with a Crime you should call me, I am a Virginia Criminal Defense Lawyer.
Also, It must be noted that most of this information, absent my personal opinions, was gleaned while reading Professor Justin Brooks “You May Go to Prison Even Though You’re Innocent.” (2023). Anyone thinking of pursuing an authoritative position should read this book.
System:
Basically, judges are often former prosecutors who have become jaded to claims of innocence after years of prosecuting and sitting on the bench. Because, when we think about scientific evidence we tend to naturally believe whatever the person on the witness stand is telling us. This is no different for Judges. Also, “The Problem with Jurors relying so heavily on expert testimony (and the science that experts are peddling) is that often there is little to no scientific basis for the testimony.[1] What is really wild to me surrounding all of this, is that law enforcement does not seem to care and would like to place innocent U.S. Citizens in Prison. That must not be allowed to stand and we need a proper reckoning. If you have been charged with a crime you should call me, I am a Virginia Criminal Defense Attorney.
Basically, often these “experts” are engaging in their own confirmation bias and putting innocent people in prison. This is the worst sort of conduct. There is an underhanded gamesmanship of experts played by Bethany A.S. Harrison(Lynchburg City Elected Prosecutor) and her office. Whoever finds the best expert “wins.” I quote “wins” because this person is focused on an outcome rather than the truth. That is a crime against humanity. The better expert does not mean whoever has the best science, it is whoever has the expert that can underhandedly manipulate the jury. We must stop this and eradicate this conduct from people in authority.
Dental Records:
Accordingly, there are innocent people locked up in United States Prisons based on nothing short of fraudulent dental record testimony. An odontologist, as it is, is allowed to get on the stand and point the finger at an accused based on dental records. Only in recent years after new scientific studies have come out are United States authorities beginning to rectify this. Some of these wrongfully convicted were only set free after DNA evidence exonerated them. But what about the people that substandard DNA evidence was collected?
Finger Printing:
Also, “The problem with fingerprinting matching is that subjective bias, and the subjective ability to make the determination of a match, varies from expert to expert.”[2] What!, are you kdding me, soo they cannot reproduce expert results that’s nuts how many people have been convicted based on that kind of false positives. We need blind verification by multiple experts before the government is allowed to use fingerprint analysis in their prosecution. Emphatically, “relying on fingerprinting can lead to wrongful convictions because of false positives, but it can also lead to guilty people going free as a result of false negatives.”[3]
Shaken Baby Syndrome:
Additionally, there have been multiple false convictions, U.S. Citizens spending decades in jail because a child they cared for died and they were later accused of abusing the child. Unquestionably, there are people who have been convicted when in reality all that happened was an accident. Surprisingly, we have experts that testify to facts and convince jury’s that it is scientific evidence when in reality there is little if any scientific basis for the hubris driven maculations.
Other:
Furthermore, other evidentiary reevaluations of “science” include Arson, Hair science, Shell Casings and Bullets. All of the science used in these types of evidence have been re-evaluated recently and have been found to place people in prison wrongfully. We need to normalize the authorities admitting to their own errors or general wrongdoing.
Solution:
"Two Questions must be asked before “scientific” evidence should be allowed to be admissible:
- The extent to which a particular forensic discipline is founded on a reliabilie scientific methodology that gives it the capacity to accurately analyze evidence and report findings; and
- The extent to which practitioners in a particular forensic discipline rely on human interpretations that could be tainted by error, the threat of bias, or the absence of sound operational procedures and robust performance standards." Id. at 122
If you have been charged with a crime, you should call me, your life may depend on it. I am a Virginia Criminal Defense Attorney.
[1] Justin Brooks “You Might Go to Prison Even Though You’re Innocent” 111 (2023).
[2] Id. at 121
[3] Id. at 122
Comments
Post a Comment