6 ms·

One of the other death row inmates mentioned in the article as having failed the junk science law, Kosoul Chanthakoummane, was partly convicted for hypnosis ind

One of the other death row inmates mentioned in the article as having failed the junk science law, Kosoul Chanthakoummane, was partly convicted for hypnosis induced testimony. The appeal response on calling it junk science was, paraphrased, "hypnosis induced testimony was known to be bogus in ~2005, when your trial was. You should have argued it then." That alone is terrible. But to make that bullshit even worse, Texas continued to use hypnosis induced testimony until 2021. It makes me wonder when the last death penalty sentence for "shaken baby syndrome" was in Texas.

lisper 3y ago
Why? Shaken Baby Syndrome is a real thing. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/shaken-baby-syndrome/symptoms-causes/syc-20366619 https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/shaken-baby-s... [UPDATE] To those of you downvoting me, would you kindly explain why? It seems like a reasonable question to me.
- YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
  lisper, it sounds like the only source you've consulted on Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS) is the Mayo Clinic website. SBS is a subject with a very long history and surrounded by great controversy [1]. I urge you to look a bit further and make an effort to understand why there is controversy. For example, the Wikipedia article on SBS has a section on "Legal Issues" that gives some details. Or you may find informative Wikipedia's article about Waney Squier, a doctor who was involved in SBS cases as an expert witness: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waney_Squier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waney_Squier The "Legal Issues" section on the SBS also mentions Waney Squire's case. ____________________ [1] Btw, this is a "controversy" in the sense of often acrimonious debate between experts and not in the sense of the "controversy" that Young Earth Creationists demand be taught in schools. It's a controversy about methodology and medical and science ethics; the kind of thing that gets up some scientists' noses.
- tbugrara 3y ago
  For the love of god, read the damn article before commenting.
- beepbooptheory 3y ago
  https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/hypnosis/about/pac-20394405 https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/hypnosis/about/p...
  - lisper 3y ago
    Sorry, you're going to have to be a little more explicit here. What does this have to do with shaken baby syndrome?
- beerandt 3y ago
  It is, but those claiming psedoscience aren't even claiming that the set of symptoms aren't "real", just that they don't deserve their own label because of the implication. "We can't explain this trio of internal head/brain/eye trauma with lack of corresponding external trauma, but don't you dare make the reasonable claim that shaking a baby can/does nominally cause the symptoms we see when a baby is, in fact, shaken."
  - YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
    That's not how it goes. Shaking was proposed as an explanation for the triad, not observed as the cause. Then the syndrome was named after the proposed explanation and used as a justification to assume shaking whenever the triad was observed. The Guardian article makes this timeline clear. Moreover, the Syndrome was used to justify suspicion of deliberate harm in cases where the triad was not observed at all, as I think in Roberson's case, if you read between the lines - no article about the case mentions the triad, only generic injuries that could, allegedly, only be caused by shaking.
  - lisper 3y ago
    Sorry, I am very confused here. The comment I was responding to said: > to make that bullshit even worse, Texas continued to use hypnosis induced testimony until 2021. That is a sentiment with which I sympathize. But then... > It makes me wonder when the last death penalty sentence for "shaken baby syndrome" was in Texas. This I don't get. Shaken baby syndrome is a real thing, and it seems to me that if someone shakes a baby to death they are guilty of murder (or at least negligent homicide) and should be treated no differently than if their victim had been older. What does it have to do with hypnosis?
    - beerandt 3y ago
      It's all about labels. To discredit and manipulate. Because 4th/5th amendment issues aside, if an interrogation or testimony via hypnosis is verifiable, who cares if hypnosis is 'real' or 'junk science'? If a man shakes a baby and that baby dies, who cares if 'SBS' is 'junk science'? It's still murder. The label shouldn't automatically validate (or invalidate/discredit) the underlying information/ action/ admission.
- rossant 3y ago
  Shaking and child abuse are obviously real things. However, the way to diagnose shaken baby syndrome has been the subject of an ongoing scientific controversy for decades. With several colleagues, we have just published a textbook about this sensitive issue [1]. I've also written about how I, as a neuroscience researcher and software engineer, came into this diagnosis [2]. Finally, an introduction to this fascinating scientific topic can be found here, with many references for those interested [3]. [1] https://shakenbaby.science https://shakenbaby.science [2] https://www.cambridgeblog.org/2023/05/a-journey-into-the-shaken-baby-syndrome-abusive-head-trauma-controversy/ https://www.cambridgeblog.org/2023/05/a-journey-into-the-sha... [3] https://cyrille.rossant.net/introduction-shaken-baby-syndrome-controversy/ https://cyrille.rossant.net/introduction-shaken-baby-syndrom...
  - YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
    Hey, can you please post your cambridgeblog.com article on HN? As you say in your article, there must be hundreds, if not thousands of people in jail for having shaken their babies to death. I can't imagine any harm more horrible that our society can perpetrate than punishing someone for the death of their loved ones when they had nothing to do with it. To think that this is done systematically is inconsolable, insufferable to contemplate.
    - rossant 3y ago
      Sure, done: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37650402 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37650402 I totally agree. This is insufferable. This is not just a virtual, academic subject to me. I've cofounded an association of French families [1] that has been contacted by 1300+ people in the past 8 years or so. I see parents losing their baby to foster care for 6, 12, 24 months or more. To say they are broken for life is an understatement. I see fathers, mothers, nannies maintain their innocence for years until they are convicted to 5 to 15 years of jail, because medical experts have certified that no other explanation than shaking could have ever caused the child's findings. Three more people I know have been convicted in the past couple of weeks. I feel so absolutely desperate and hopeless seeing people going to jail one after the other, week after week, while I can't do anything about it. All cases are not illegitimate, of course, but there are serious reasons to be doubtful when there is no external evidence of trauma, strong and sustained denials, and no antecedent of abuse. For sure, we have tried to alert medical authorities, doctors, politicians, institutions, judges, celebrities, scientists, journalists for years, and almost no one actually cares, while those who do will do everything in their power to cancel and suppress us (Waney Squier is one among many other examples, Chapter 1 of our Cambridge book provides more examples). I see no other example in our modern history of an active, systematic endeavor that has been so destructive to so many people for so long. [1] https://adikia.fr/ https://adikia.fr/

lisper 3y ago

Why? Shaken Baby Syndrome is a real thing. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/shaken-baby-syndrome/symptoms-causes/syc-20366619 https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/shaken-baby-s... [UPDATE] To those of you downvoting me, would you kindly explain why? It seems like a reasonable question to me.

YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
lisper, it sounds like the only source you've consulted on Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS) is the Mayo Clinic website. SBS is a subject with a very long history and surrounded by great controversy [1]. I urge you to look a bit further and make an effort to understand why there is controversy. For example, the Wikipedia article on SBS has a section on "Legal Issues" that gives some details. Or you may find informative Wikipedia's article about Waney Squier, a doctor who was involved in SBS cases as an expert witness: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waney_Squier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waney_Squier The "Legal Issues" section on the SBS also mentions Waney Squire's case. ____________________ [1] Btw, this is a "controversy" in the sense of often acrimonious debate between experts and not in the sense of the "controversy" that Young Earth Creationists demand be taught in schools. It's a controversy about methodology and medical and science ethics; the kind of thing that gets up some scientists' noses.
tbugrara 3y ago
For the love of god, read the damn article before commenting.
beepbooptheory 3y ago
https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/hypnosis/about/pac-20394405 https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/hypnosis/about/p...
- lisper 3y ago
  Sorry, you're going to have to be a little more explicit here. What does this have to do with shaken baby syndrome?
beerandt 3y ago
It is, but those claiming psedoscience aren't even claiming that the set of symptoms aren't "real", just that they don't deserve their own label because of the implication. "We can't explain this trio of internal head/brain/eye trauma with lack of corresponding external trauma, but don't you dare make the reasonable claim that shaking a baby can/does nominally cause the symptoms we see when a baby is, in fact, shaken."
- YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
  That's not how it goes. Shaking was proposed as an explanation for the triad, not observed as the cause. Then the syndrome was named after the proposed explanation and used as a justification to assume shaking whenever the triad was observed. The Guardian article makes this timeline clear. Moreover, the Syndrome was used to justify suspicion of deliberate harm in cases where the triad was not observed at all, as I think in Roberson's case, if you read between the lines - no article about the case mentions the triad, only generic injuries that could, allegedly, only be caused by shaking.
- lisper 3y ago
  Sorry, I am very confused here. The comment I was responding to said: > to make that bullshit even worse, Texas continued to use hypnosis induced testimony until 2021. That is a sentiment with which I sympathize. But then... > It makes me wonder when the last death penalty sentence for "shaken baby syndrome" was in Texas. This I don't get. Shaken baby syndrome is a real thing, and it seems to me that if someone shakes a baby to death they are guilty of murder (or at least negligent homicide) and should be treated no differently than if their victim had been older. What does it have to do with hypnosis?
  - beerandt 3y ago
    It's all about labels. To discredit and manipulate. Because 4th/5th amendment issues aside, if an interrogation or testimony via hypnosis is verifiable, who cares if hypnosis is 'real' or 'junk science'? If a man shakes a baby and that baby dies, who cares if 'SBS' is 'junk science'? It's still murder. The label shouldn't automatically validate (or invalidate/discredit) the underlying information/ action/ admission.
rossant 3y ago
Shaking and child abuse are obviously real things. However, the way to diagnose shaken baby syndrome has been the subject of an ongoing scientific controversy for decades. With several colleagues, we have just published a textbook about this sensitive issue [1]. I've also written about how I, as a neuroscience researcher and software engineer, came into this diagnosis [2]. Finally, an introduction to this fascinating scientific topic can be found here, with many references for those interested [3]. [1] https://shakenbaby.science https://shakenbaby.science [2] https://www.cambridgeblog.org/2023/05/a-journey-into-the-shaken-baby-syndrome-abusive-head-trauma-controversy/ https://www.cambridgeblog.org/2023/05/a-journey-into-the-sha... [3] https://cyrille.rossant.net/introduction-shaken-baby-syndrome-controversy/ https://cyrille.rossant.net/introduction-shaken-baby-syndrom...
- YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
  Hey, can you please post your cambridgeblog.com article on HN? As you say in your article, there must be hundreds, if not thousands of people in jail for having shaken their babies to death. I can't imagine any harm more horrible that our society can perpetrate than punishing someone for the death of their loved ones when they had nothing to do with it. To think that this is done systematically is inconsolable, insufferable to contemplate.
  - rossant 3y ago
    Sure, done: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37650402 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37650402 I totally agree. This is insufferable. This is not just a virtual, academic subject to me. I've cofounded an association of French families [1] that has been contacted by 1300+ people in the past 8 years or so. I see parents losing their baby to foster care for 6, 12, 24 months or more. To say they are broken for life is an understatement. I see fathers, mothers, nannies maintain their innocence for years until they are convicted to 5 to 15 years of jail, because medical experts have certified that no other explanation than shaking could have ever caused the child's findings. Three more people I know have been convicted in the past couple of weeks. I feel so absolutely desperate and hopeless seeing people going to jail one after the other, week after week, while I can't do anything about it. All cases are not illegitimate, of course, but there are serious reasons to be doubtful when there is no external evidence of trauma, strong and sustained denials, and no antecedent of abuse. For sure, we have tried to alert medical authorities, doctors, politicians, institutions, judges, celebrities, scientists, journalists for years, and almost no one actually cares, while those who do will do everything in their power to cancel and suppress us (Waney Squier is one among many other examples, Chapter 1 of our Cambridge book provides more examples). I see no other example in our modern history of an active, systematic endeavor that has been so destructive to so many people for so long. [1] https://adikia.fr/ https://adikia.fr/