“Science based evidence”

12 Replies to ““Science based evidence””

1. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Smith_(pathologist)
   Disturbing how often this sort of thing seems to happen.

2. Police are supposed to be neutral too. They are usually plunked under the solicitor general instead of the attorney general. It’s the attorney general’s job to send people to jail. I suspect most police would think their job is to get convictions instead of presenting an objective case to the court. I don’t even think they try to maintain the charade.

3. See also Deborah Madden … http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Latest-S-F-crime-lab-scandal-points-to-need-for-6168836.php … SF crime lab tech whose cocaine theft caused thousands of drug cases get dismissed … much to the delight of then SF DA Kamela (commie) Harris.
   My opinion … as to why this occurs so regularly ? Government workers. Never described as the best and the brightest.

4. Cya. Stfu. Unions.

5. Cya. Stfu. Unions.

6. I agree, Scar.
   There’s also this bit.
   “Many of those convicted through Dookhan’s work likely did commit the offenses, but many did not, defense lawyers say.”
   None of that speculation matters. The burden of proof is on the state. If the evidence is contaminated, there’s no conviction. Not only has Massachusetts suffered a huge blow to its law enforcement system, it’s now faced with massive lawsuits and compensation claims. It deserves the punishment it’s about to get.

7. But, but, but ….. don’t you question the “experts”.
   Who do you think you are?
   An expert?

8. Why is split sample testing not an option like it is in every major sports organization in the world?

9. If the problem was just ‘a rogue chemist’, there wouldn’t have been a five year court battle after discovering her fraud.
   Who in the legal system looks at that case and says ‘Well yes, she’s been fraudulently fixing cases for the prosecution, possibly forever, but let’s fight this in court for half a decade!’

10. Oh ya. oooooohhhh ya. it’s called a class action suit. takes 200 years to work its way thru the same legal cystem but in the end the only losers are the targets of the suit. note I call it ‘legal’ not ‘justice’ cystem. and no, THAT isnt a spelling mistake either.
    and for similar malfeasance, and I use that word deliberately because it is tied in with an agenda, google ‘Motherisk scandal’ or this link:
    https://www.thestar.com/news/motherisk.html
    thousands of lives RUINED and those responsible get away with a quiet ‘oopsie’.

11. “But, but, but ….. don’t you question the ‘experts’.”
    To quote the late theoretical physicist, Dr Richard Feynman:
    “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.”

12. Split sample testing?
    Independent labs?
    That costs money and time. The government can’t afford those extravagances!
    The government does have the time and money to fight this fight for five long years though. Now they will find the time and money to recompense the “innocent” and some that are actually innocent. Penny wise, millionaire foolish.
    Most of those convicted are either guilty, or too damned poor to fight the charges. They don’t have the money to fight and pay for an independent lab. IIRC, much of her wrong doing was scaling up the “take” so rather than a misdemeanor, the confiscated drugs were a felony because of weight and “laboratory increased” purity.
    TimR, I agree, this should be standard practice with at least a statistical sample of the analyses. Imagine what happens if 2-5% of the analyses were verified as they go along? This story never happens!