14 ms·
NYC scientist fired after raising questions about a DNA test gets $1M settlement
- osrec 8y agoHeadline reads like Daily Mail clickbait. Edit: thanks for updating the title.
- vorhp 8y agoIt's the New York Times, so not too far from Daily Mail.
- duxup 8y agoIt's quite far from Daily Mail.
- coldtea 8y agoYeah, as much as London from New York. The trite content is similar, just the audience changes (working class vs (upper) middle class). It's like Taco Bell vs Chipotle, both are hardly where those who know better go to eat.
- duxup 8y ago>The trite content is similar, just the audience changes (working class vs (upper) middle class). It's like Taco Bell vs Chipotle, both are hardly where those who know better go to eat. I don't know what you're saying there. This article doesn't seem "trite".
- coldtea 8y ago>This article doesn't seem "trite". The threard wasn't about the article, but about the (article's, and original here too) headline. The article is just a news story, so not much room for triteness. Still, plenty of trite in NYT.
- jrockway 8y agoI like Chipotle and the New York Times.
- coldtea 8y agoMany do. Also Starbucks, fair trade coffee, This American Life, Malcom Gladwell books, and other fine things.
- stevezsa8 8y agoNah... Daily Mail headline would be 'foreigner taking away our DNA tests'
- sophacles 8y agoMay read like that, but its actually just a good summary of the actual article.
- duxup 8y agoThe phrasing fits some clickbait articles, but unlike clickbait articles the story seems to fit the title. I think that's a significant difference even if I don't like the phrasing.
- duxup 8y ago> a novel form of DNA testing being used in criminal cases I feel like any "novel form of" really shouldn't be evidence until it's proven. Granted I also recognize how courts really struggle understanding the magical world of what science is proven and what isn't. I do worry that it's up to each defendant to effectively fight these fights that are big topics and would be crazy expensive to "disprove" something the government says is proven, but isn't.
- sametmax 8y ago> Granted I also recognize how courts really struggle understanding the magical world of what science is proven and what isn't. I don't understand how. Aren't you suppose to study logic to be a a judge ? Surely laws and argumentation are a central topic, and they all require a brain. How somebody unable to understand simple concept like probabilities can be judge ?
- testvox 8y agoJudges in many parts of the United States are elected, so there is no particular guarantee they have studied anything.
- sametmax 8y agoOh, wow. That explains a lot of things I couldn't understand from news I read.
- cm2012 8y agoOnes that aren't elected are appointed. Typically they're appointed because they're related or friends with the elected officials doing the appointing (My dad is a court officer in NY state - he's seen over and over again that nepotism is absolutely the norm and not the exception for all appointed positions). Any merit judges have compared to a baseline lawyer is basically accidental.
- duxup 8y ago
- sophacles 8y agoThe people who criticized her and fired her need to be removed from their positions and barred from working in the public sector ever again. Further any action they've taken in the name of "the public" needs to be validated by an independent group. It's a hard-line stance I know. Anything less tho is just externalizing the damage done by these fools and their "win at all costs" mentality. It's easy to have that mentality when the "costs" to the actor are - at worst - keeping ill gotten gains and some slap on the wrist, while the real consequences are borne by people who are effectively collateral damage. Sure I'm a crazy hippie, but the fact that this woman got a settlement does nothing to help the real problem. If anything, it makes it worse - the people are distracted by the bread and circuses of a person getting a pile of money, while the NY medical examiner's office gets to purge a person fighting for actual correctness. I'm sure her absence will make it easier for prosecutors to "win" more, since there are fewer people arguing to do silly things like trying to follow the prinicple of "prosecute the actual offender".
- hn_throwaway_99 8y agoBefore pulling out the pitchforks, I'd encourage you to investigate with more than just one article. It may very well be everything you recommend is warranted, but be aware that once reporters decide on the narrative for a story, they pull out quotes and data in a manner that specifically supports that narrative. I know I've been burned in the past by just reading one side of the story and getting angry before understanding the entirety of what happened.
- Razengan 8y agoThe above comment was gray, within 5 minutes of being posted. Perhaps the karma threshold for downvoting needs to be raised to balance the Redditization of HN.
- dsfyu404ed 8y agoOr just subtract one karma from the person doing the down-voting as well so people only down-vote when it's "really" worth it. Prolific down-voters would float around the down-vote karma threshold and basically be rate limited by the number of upvotes they get.
- JamesWebb 8y agoAre they still using the test she questioned?
- hn_throwaway_99 8y agoNo
- busterarm 8y agoHow many times are we going to let junk science poison our judicial system?
- HeWhoLurksLate 8y agoHow much longer until we start investigating prosecutors for potential misconduct by an outside source that's not tied to their organization? Edit: formatting.
- jrockway 8y agoWe are trying to add state-level oversight in New York. Prosecutors believe that oversight is “marred by constitutional defects.” https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/05/nyregion/ny-prosecutors-cuomo.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/05/nyregion/ny-prosecutors-c...
- jniedrauer 8y agoSo the city claimed that a study had been done but refused to release it. When pressed to release it, they fired those involved. How is this not career ending for anyone who knew the study didn't exist but claimed it did?
- 4ntonius8lock 8y agoLook up a book called Encyclopedia of Ethical Failure It's produced by the Federal Government as a way to show people the 'grave consequences' of misbehaving as a government employee. I'm not a government employee, but it was recommended to me and it floored me. The amount of shit you can get away with if you are a government employee is mind boggling. I think this book should be read by every school child so they know the type of double standard and corruption that is rampant in government.
- telchar 8y agoIt sounds like the book had the exact opposite effect on you as was intended. Why do you think that was?
- 4ntonius8lock 8y agoPerspective. This is what I feel the book was trying to tell government employees: 'This is a great job. You will move up and never get fired, just don't do anything too bad or we will whip you with a wet noodle... it will be oh so horribly humiliating... you might even get a suspension (read paid vacation) or worse' Here's how I was reading it: 'oh my god, if I did that as a small business owner I would be jailed, sued and have a criminal record... my business assets would be frozen, I'd possibly be charged with money laundering or wire fraud or some other vague laws... what do you mean 'possible suspension' for government employees doing that?
- stagger87 8y agoIs there an example that stands out?
- dontbenebby 8y ago>The city and the Office of Chief Medical Examiner said Monday that the settlement did not mean that Ms. Stajic was treated inappropriately. Weird - I thought the lottery was run at the state level.
- DiseasedBadger 8y agoGive her a medal! We need to get serious about celebrating whistleblowers.
- peteradio 8y agoWow fuck Dr. Sampson she should not be in that position.