[Ssc-dev] When scientific evidence turns out to be wrong

[Harlo Holmes]

yes! thank you for posting!
On Apr 21, 2015 11:06 AM, "Nathan of Guardian" <nathan at guardianproject.info>
wrote:

>
>
> https://talk.developersquare.net/t/when-scientific-evidence-turns-out-to-be-wrong/51
>
> We've do a lot of work on using smartphone sensors as digital evidence
> and proof through our InformaCam project
> (https://guardianproject.info/informa). However, here's a sad case of
> where the power of science was greatly exaggerated and overstated,
> resulting in a tragic and unjust outcome.
>
> FBI Admits Flawed Hair Analysis in Hundreds of Cases Spanning Decades
>
> http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/30323-fbi-admits-flawed-hair-analysis-in-hundreds-of-cases-spanning-decades
>
> Tuesday, 21 April 2015 10:29
> By Terrell Jermaine Starr, AlterNet | Report
> font size decrease font size increase font size Print
> Over the course of more than two decades prior to 2000, most of the
> examiners in an FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in most of the
> trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants, the
> Washington Post reported Sunday.
>
> In 268 trials reviewed so far, 26 of the 28 examiners with the FBI
> Laboratory's microscopic hair comparison unit overstated evidence that
> favored the prosecution more than 95 percent of the time, according to
> the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) and the
> Innocence Project. Now the FBI and Justice Departments have formally
> admitted to this grave miscarriage of justice.
>
> The flawed testimony had devastating impacts on many of the defendants.
> At least 32 were sentenced to death. Fourteen have been executed or died
> in prison. Prosecutors and the affected defendants have been notified in
> case there are grounds for appeals. Four defendants have already been
> exonerated.
>
> The FBI has identified roughly 2,500 cases for review in which a hair
> match was made by the FBI lab. In fact hair analysis and "definitive
> matches" are a lot more subjective than was claimed. The Justice
> Department and FBI said in a statement that they "are committed to
> ensuring that affected defendants are notified of past errors and that
> justice is done in every instance. The Department and the FBI are
> committed to ensuring the accuracy of future hair analysis testimony, as
> well as the application of all disciplines of forensic science."
>
> After federal authorities launched a federal investigation in 2012, FBI
> experts were found to have used incomplete or misleading statistics
> during testimonies in which they testified that hairs found at crime
> scenes were near-certain matches to defendants. Hundreds of potentially
> innocent people may have been wrongfully convicted as a result of these
> testimonies from cases that date back to the 1970s.
>
> Issues with misleading hair analysis isn't new, but the scale of the new
> admissions is. In 2002, the FBI admitted that its experts reported false
> hair matches more than 11 percent of the time. In Washington, DC, three
> of seven defendants whose trials included flawed testimony have been
> exonerated since 2009. Other courts have exonerated two other men. All
> of the exonerated had served 20 to 30 years prison time on rape and
> murder convictions.
>
> As The Post reports, correcting the problem may be harder than admitting
> it, since it relies on local judges and prosecutors' and defense
> lawyers' willingness and cooperation:
>
> University of Virginia law professor Brandon L. Garrett said the results
> reveal a "mass disaster" inside the criminal justice system, one that it
> has been unable to self-correct because courts rely on outdated
> precedents admitting scientifically invalid testimony at trial and,
> under the legal doctrine of finality, make it difficult for convicts to
> challenge old evidence.
> "The tools don't exist to handle systematic errors in our criminal
> justice system," Garrett said. "The FBI deserves every recognition for
> doing something really remarkable here. The problem is there may be few
> judges, prosecutors or defense lawyers who are able or willing to do
> anything about it."
> Federal authorities are offering new DNA testing in cases with errors,
> if sought by a judge or prosecutor, and agreeing to drop procedural
> objections to appeals in federal cases.
> However, biological evidence in the cases often is lost or unavailable.
> Among states, only California and Texas specifically allow appeals when
> experts recant or scientific advances undermine forensic evidence at
> trial.
> So far, the FBI has almost finished reviewing 350 trial testimonies and
> 900 lab reports and about 1,200 cases still need to be reviewed. The
> bureau hasn't been able to review 700 cases because prosecutors or
> police didn't respond to information requests.
> This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may
> not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the
> source.
> --
>   Nathan of Guardian
>   nathan at guardianproject.info
> _______________________________________________
> Ssc-dev mailing list
>
> Post: Ssc-dev at lists.mayfirst.org
> List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/ssc-dev
>
> To Unsubscribe
>         Send email to:  Ssc-dev-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org
>         Or visit:
> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/ssc-dev/harlo.holmes%40gmail.com
>
> You are subscribed as: harlo.holmes at gmail.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mayfirst.org/pipermail/ssc-dev/attachments/20150421/2f3c4deb/attachment.html>