Hotep,
Various sources are revealing inconsistencies within the State Bureau of Investigations’ (SBI) crime lab. One particular fire arms analyst in North Carolina is under scrutiny for doctoring evidence to corroborate investigating officer’s theories of how a crime may have occurred and who the perpetrator should be. Real talk.
Society has to ask: How many more forensic scientists are practicing this injustice?
Then you’d have to wonder: How many of these tainted cases resulted in death sentences?
Eventually you’d consider the racial justice factor: How many of these cases had white victims and black defendants? Feel me?
Without a doubt, the integrity of the SBI is suspect. The average juror has no idea what the credentials of an expert witness should be. So, when a SBI agent takes the stand in a capital case, the district attorney allows them to reel off their forensic credentials in a way in which the jurors are willing to believe anything the expert witness says.
The verbal resume of the expert witness may be so convincing that when the defense questions the credentials of an expert witness, the jurors may take offense, because they want to believe that this person on the stand is a straight forward expert witness. Na mean?
Well, being considered as an expert doesn’t mean that you’re always right and it doesn’t mean you’re always honest either. Ya heard?
Check out these stories:
Nuff Said,
MannofStat
Copyright © 2010 by Leroy Mann
No comments:
Post a Comment