4 ms·
>How are lay people supposed to understand the difference? Well first off lay people not to stop placing government agents on a God like pedestal where by ever
by the_ancient 11y ago
>How are lay people supposed to understand the difference?
Well first off lay people not to stop placing government agents on a God like pedestal where by everything a "forensic scientist" from the state utters in court is assumed to be truthful and beyond questioning.
This is how we get terrible science and convictions, the public watches a episode of CSI or NCIS where you have infinite zoom and enhance, where you can do facial recognition on a person in a ATM video from 25 miles away, where 2 people can hack all encryption by typing on the same keyboard really fast....
They see this shit, so then when a person from the FBI gets on the stands, says a bunch of big words, and points to the scary man or women at the table saying they did it... the case is over....
- nroets 11y agoI mostly agree with you. It is however a serious flaw of the jury system. Forensic science is NOT in the terrible state that the OP makes it out to be.
- the_ancient 11y agoI think the OP is being kind.... I question even the validity of fingerprint matching one of the oldest "Forensic science" fields. Almost nothing in "Forensic science" follows the actual scientific method. There is far far far far far too many assumptions, "intuitive leaps", and formation of a preconceived narrative round "science" They make the evidence fit their story, vs allowing the evidence to tell a story.