3 ms·
So, it appears that evidence processing has something akin to zero controls and (effective) auditing? Where prosecutors either knew of or had strong reason to
by pasbesoin 13y ago
So, it appears that evidence processing has something akin to zero controls and (effective) auditing?
Where prosecutors either knew of or had strong reason to suspect this misbehavior, their immunity should be dissolved and they should be prosecuted. Their personal assets should also be subject to forfeiture for compensation.
- sigstoat 13y agowell, usually the state government has some body which certifies these labs. that works for shit (see colorado). the only real audit is defendants having the evidence retested by their own experts. reputable privately operated laboratories doing this sort of testing for forensic purposes do exist.
- kmfrk 13y agoDon't worry, it gets worse: http://www.npr.org/series/133208980/post-mortem-death-investigation-in-america http://www.npr.org/series/133208980/post-mortem-death-invest....
- sigstoat 13y agobuddy, that's not even scratching the surface. when rural counties are barely willing to pay the elected coroner their stipend, they're surely not going to fund a forensic pathologist ($$$!) and the staff/tools/testing to make them effective. there are homicides that go undetected left and right, and a distressing number of forensically sophisticated criminals out there. but everybody thinks the cops whip out some crazy CSI team for every case, and leave no stone unturned, and no test unperformed (hahaha!), so there's no motivation for anybody to try and get the funding necessary.