3 ms·
He may not have claimed it, but when you stand in front of a jury and say something to the extent of "I'm an expert in knot analysis. This is the analytic syste
by EggsOnToast 9y ago
He may not have claimed it, but when you stand in front of a jury and say something to the extent of "I'm an expert in knot analysis. This is the analytic system I employed to reach this particular conclusion" the implication to a jury of laymen is that you've employed a scientific method of some sort.
- wolfgke 9y ago> He may not have claimed it, but when you stand in front of a jury and say something to the extent of "I'm an expert in knot analysis. This is the analytic system I employed to reach this particular conclusion" the implication to a jury of laymen is that you've employed a scientific method of some sort. This is rather an argument against a jury of laymen.
- lukev 9y agoAnd yet that is what is mandated in the constitution.
- wolfgke 9y ago> And yet that is what is mandated in the constitution. I don't live in the USA and am not US citizen - many HN readers don't either :-)
- EggsOnToast 9y agoIt can be used as an argument against both. But that's irrelevant to a discussion about what the presentation of this evidence says to a jury.