if

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

this happened as described some folks need to go to jail for a while

http://www.wcnc.com/news/Crime-Lab-mistakes-101224699.html

[RoadKingLarry]

We've had some similar problems in Oklahoma at our Medical Examiner's Office. Head ME resigned in shame, many convictions called into question, some overturned. but so far no prosecutions for misconduct.

[Nitrogen]

This is precisely why defense lawyers want to be able to question medical examiners, people who run tests, etc, instead of just accepting affidavits.

[roo_ster]

IIRC, the FBI has had similar problems in the past.

Frankly, until they implement some decent scientific and statistical rigor, most of their product is crap anyway.

[RevDisk]

IIRC, the FBI has had similar problems in the past.

Frankly, until they implement some decent scientific and statistical rigor, most of their product is crap anyway.

It's honestly amazing how high people hold "forensic evidence", and how shockingly bad the standards are for said forensic evidence.  If any standard exists, which it often doesn't or is completely arbitrary.  But hey, it looks impressive on TeeVee, so it must be good.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

The problem here isn't with the quality of the evidence produced by the lab, it's how that evidence was used/abused during prosecutions.  Apparently the set policy of the crime lab was to withhold certain types of evidence that might be valuable to the defense.

State politics is as corrupt as it comes here in NC, and it goes right to the top.  The state attorney general's office appears to be the place where future governors are groomed.  The previous governor (Mike Easley - he's knee deep in corruption charges/allegations/investigations) was AG back when the crime lab was pulling this crap.  (The crime lab falls under the AG's office, so it's the AG's job to set their policies.)  

The current AG, Roy Cooper, the man now leading the charge to clean up the lab, is also gunning for governor some day.  He's been AG for a decade, but didn't lift a finger to fix the crime lab policies until it became a hot political issue in the past month or so.  Now that it's politically advantageous, he's going full speed ahead to the nearest camera to explain how he's going to make it all better "for the little guy".

Anyway, don't blame the science for this one.  This is nothing but good ol' fashion political corruption.

[roo_ster]

Anyway, don't blame the science for this one.  This is nothing but good ol' fashion political corruption.

Good old fashioned political corruption does not preclude crap science. 

And I am not talking sloshing the test tubes or mis-labeling samples.  I am talking about methodology that folks are going on the stand and testifying about that is 100% endorsed by the "forensic science" community that does not meet basic standards of scientific rigor.

[taurusowner]

It's honestly amazing how high people hold "forensic evidence", and how shockingly bad the standards are for said forensic evidence.  If any standard exists, which it often doesn't or is completely arbitrary.  But hey, it looks impressive on TeeVee, so it must be good.

I am absolutely shaking with anticipation waiting to hear your new solutions to investigating and prosecuting crimes.

[RevDisk]

I am absolutely shaking with anticipation waiting to hear your new solutions to investigating and prosecuting crimes.

Peer review the forensic procedures and methodologies with qualified persons using open standards.  You know, like the rest of the science community. 

If you think I am being unreasonable...  Would you shoot up drugs because an unqualified person made a guess that it was safe because they conducted their own tests that did not meet any standards or review?   

[HankB]

This is precisely why defense lawyers want to be able to question medical examiners, people who run tests, etc, instead of just accepting affidavits. 

Were I a juror on a case involving forensic evidence, I'd be inclined to dismiss out of hand any "evidence" coming from a person that was not subject to cross examination.

Human beings, despite their best intentions, CAN make mistakes. Regrettable, but not a crime. The State should compensate people who were wrongfully convicted without malice.

But when crime labs falsify evidence, withold mitigating evidence, or act in reckless disregard for the truth, IMHO the persons responsible, when found out, ought to get the same sentence as those who were wrongfully convicted. And if multiple people were convicted wrongly, then the sentences ought to be consecutive, not concurrent.

About as likely as a snowball in hell . . .

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

IMHO the persons responsible, when found out, ought to get the same sentence as those who were wrongfully convicted. And if multiple people were convicted wrongly, then the sentences ought to be consecutive, not concurrent.


too soft  we need a multiplier  at least 2 and for small stuff 5

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Good old fashioned political corruption does not preclude crap science.  

That's true, but there's no indication that the science from this particular NC crime lab was bad.  The hullabaloo is all about the fact the lab routinely withheld certain types of evidence from defendants, apparently to bolster the conviction rates obtained by DAs.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

yea   and that should get you hard time  to encourage the others

[French G.]

It's honestly amazing how high people hold "forensic evidence", and how shockingly bad the standards are for said forensic evidence.  If any standard exists, which it often doesn't or is completely arbitrary.  But hey, it looks impressive on TeeVee, so it must be good.

I get the distinct impression that most juries are ill equipped to deal with questions of chain of custody, veracity of experts or results, or even basic understanding of the science. Justice turns more into a game of buy the better expert.