A few years back there were some stories in a Swedish newspaper about a method for medical age estimation of asylum seekers developed by a government agency. I

A few years back there were some stories in a Swedish newspaper about a method for medical age estimation of asylum seekers developed by a government agency. I could hardly believe my eyes when the person responsible for the accuracy of the method was quoted as saying that it was very reliable, because it used two unreliable methods to estimate if the person was above 18 years old, and then concluded that they were 18+ if either method so indicated. You don’t need to be a genius to realize your false 18+ rate will be higher when combining two methods in this way than it would be if you used a single method, but he argued the opposite. This caught my attention and I spent an inordinate amount of time, together with a group of other concerned people, trying to convince this government authority they were wrong, and later to expose them for it / stop them from continuing. But it sadly turned out to be next to impossible. They persisted with inaccurate/false affidavits and court testimony for years, until finally the minister of justice ordered a formal probe into the method. They then patched it up as best they could without exposing their previous errors, and pretended like nothing had happened. The formal probe issued an interim report with pretty harsh commentary, and was then cancelled by the minister of justice before it could give its final report. Forever changed my view of the Swedish justice system.