Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

hydrOHxide t1_j1x52ta wrote

Reply to comment by DragonGarlicBreath in Evidence unearthed by podcasters frees 2 Georgia men imprisoned for 25 years by efranklin13

But that's all part of the Great American Show Trial. Much like the trial itself is a show to convince the jury of your narrative and give a f*** about what the evidence actually supports. Experts in the adversarial system are likewise engaged in a d*ck swinging contest, with frequent attempts of lawyers and prosecutors trying to out-expert the expert in cross. That's not how science properly works and it makes many a worthy expert reluctant to do that job.

What matters is that the public is entertained and gets its good vibes that someone is made to pay.

22

DragonGarlicBreath t1_j1xhz9l wrote

I'm not saying prosecutors don't exploit the hell out of things at the expense of actual justice, I'm just saying the other side of the coin is that voters are letting them do it. Just like every politician who uses manufactered divisive issues: they're dog doo on democracies shoe, but we long as voters reward them for it, they'll keep doing it. No one is doing their jobs here.

5

4gotOldU-name t1_j1yhy8j wrote

My experience differs greatly from what you describe.

Was a juror in a high profile murder trial that eventually was a 20/20 episode (complete with horrific pictures of "shotgun vs. head"). It had none of the negative things you described.

Perhaps it is very different, depending on the state one is in?

4

hydrOHxide t1_j1ynj12 wrote

Well, as a trained biomedical scientist, I go by reports from within the community and what reports I see.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0015736892730758

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/07/is-an-adversarial-justice-system-compatible-with-good-science/

5

4gotOldU-name t1_j1yo7t8 wrote

>Experts in the adversarial system are likewise engaged in a d*ck swinging contest, with frequent attempts of lawyers and prosecutors trying to out-expert the expert in cross.

So, how scientific is a "dick swinging contest"?

Or an Op Ed from the Washington Post?

Both are behind pay walls, so wasn't able to read either.

1