Radley Balko & Roger Koppl | August 12, 2008
Reason needs your support. Please donate today!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
(310) 367-6109
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.
|8.12.08 @ 5:35PM|#
Ron Paul's wife is in the hospital:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hMxQKsi9x1g_L-ScJuNwrj_msxVwD92GDH7G2
Best wishes to her!
|8.12.08 @ 6:05PM|#
a simple reform would be the use of blind testing. iow, the analyst would be presented with the evidence and (say) twenty tests, all coded and randomized, one of which is the suspect. if the analyst can match evidence and suspect, that alone will reduce the error rate to below 5%.
kinnath|8.12.08 @ 6:18PM|#
Radley is my hero.
anarch|8.12.08 @ 6:36PM|#
Topically...
(Not my fault if the NY Times wants you to log in.)
|8.12.08 @ 7:31PM|#
Reform? We just need people that know what they are doing, thats all.
JT
http://www.Ultimate-Anonymity.com
|8.12.08 @ 10:02PM|#
http://fieldsobrietytest.info
Pete from Chicago|8.12.08 @ 10:10PM|#
The article's criticism of forensics and the proposed solutions are all sound, but I was a little confused when it suggested that our justice system is outdated and hasn't kept up with scientific developments.
Which developments in the world of science have rendered making arguements before a jury outdated?
Scientific evidence is fallible, isn't it? Theories are revised continually in light of new information, and everything?
I would hope that we keep using logical reasoning in a courtroom, not encourage law enforcement to confuse juries even more with the idea we can prove guilt by shining a purple lamp over a cumstain.
the innominate one|8.12.08 @ 10:39PM|#
good article, good suggestions, Radley
Barbara Black|8.18.08 @ 8:18PM|#
Hayne's findings in an autopsy seems to be jusstt whatever the prosecutor orders. Hayne and his sidekicks, the prosecutors, ousted Dr. Emily Ward when she disagreed with the "powers that be" and unless Mississippians unite to be heard, Hayne'sa next victim could be you or your loved one. It is time the 'Little Rascals' be disbanded or disbarred! Oh, sorry, I guess I'm behind times, Hayne's is looking for a nother state to victimize the poor people. My son, Henry Moses, is in Parchman for life because of Dr. Hayne's testimony. He was indicted for his wife's death, not murder. He and she were really bad alcoholics. She was in a car accident and two and one half months later she died. She had broken ribs, badly crushed hip. She was so drunk at the time that surgery couldn't be done until the next day. In Haynes autopsy he did not mention a scar on her body from hip surgery, nor did he mention that 80% of heer liver cells were deead. Two ER doctors that saw her in ER three days prior to her death testified that she died from kidney failure and liver failure due to drinking so much alcohol and taking so many tylenol. My family has tried so hard to get people to listen to us. There are more than one Henry Moses in these MS prisons. Please God, help my son.