Evidence in criminal cases can put someone in prison. Getting it right matters. Getting away with it matters even more to the perpetrator. The Wikipedia article on Eyewitness identification is especially important. It is what persuades jurors most and what is most likely to be wrong. See Evidence as well. Robert Henderson gives comprehensive advice in Police, Law And You. Know about Powers Of Arrest & Resistance to Interrogation, especially if you are not guilty. Career criminals have passed that way before so the they know the score.
Rolf Harris – Beyond Reasonable Doubt?
He was accused of being a Paedophile then convicted so he must be guilty? No! Eye witness evidence, childhood recollections decades later are not reliable.
If you find that hard to believe there is a very good TED Talk dealing with it here [ Elizabeth Loftus: The fiction of memory ] and another here [ Scott Fraser: The problem with eyewitness testimony ]. As a principle of justice it seems absurd that anyone can be convicted simply on the unsupported “evidence” of someone else accusing them of a crime.
Police And Cameras
Police hate cameras. Police hate any evidence they can't beat using perjury, intimidation et cetera. This is one bit of law you really should know.
Computers And Filth
Don't do it. Failing which, don't get caught. Wiping old files properly is possible and desirable not merely regarding this kind of nausea. Albeit the site seems to be for perverts who want to get away with evil.
DNA Evidence Must Be Destroyed
Blair is a Fascist swine over ruled by Europe. DNA of the not guilty must NOT be held. See Gene Watch too.
DNA Evidence And Fraud
If there's one application of modern genetics that the public has not only accepted but embraced, it's the use of DNA testing in criminal investigations. Courts have accepted DNA evidence as definitive, and it's difficult to imagine a movie or TV show that focuses on law enforcement but declines to use DNA testing as a plot device. The reason is simple: given a valid DNA sample, the tests can match it to its source with probabilities that exclude the rest of our planet's population. Those probabilities still hold, but some researchers have now looked into whether it's possible to fake a valid DNA sample, and they have come up with a disturbing answer: just about any molecular biology lab has the tools to do so.
The average crook does not know how. The average jury doesn't either. Ditto for the judge. Rich crooks can buy the skill. That often means Jews - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/science/18dna.html?_r=1 - DNA Evidence Can Be Fabricated, Scientists Show and http://www.fsigenetics.com/article/S1872-4973(09)00099-4/abstract - Authentication of forensic DNA samples
A Very Dodgy Conviction
On 2 July 2001 Barry George, 41, was convicted at the Old Bailey of the murder of the broadcaster Jill Dando, best known as the presenter of the BBC programme Crimewatch. Few, if any recent convictions, have been greeted with such disquiet by the media. Leader comment (3 July) from the Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph give the gist of press feeling: "Despite his loathsome character and criminal record, the evidence against George was hardly compelling" (Daily Mail). "...there can be few convictions that need the imprimatur of the higher courts [ie the agreement of the Court of Appeal that the conviction is sound] more than this." (Daily Telegraph). The comment is all the more noteworthy for coming from the two British national newspapers most unfriendly to the criminal and most supportive of the courts and the police.
The BBC was making a fuss because one of their own was murdered. The Met wanted a result. They fingered a half wit with a bit of previous, a man from their List of Usual Suspects. The Crown Prosecution Service allowed extremely dubious evidence to be used to make a case. He went away for eight years because a Jury was not really on the ball. Law is a crap shoot. Scott Lomax goes over the same ground in The Case of Barry George, Legal Notes No. 40, 2003.
Should you ever trust expert evidence? Not without a large dose of common sense especially if you are at the receiving end.
Is a source; good, bad or indifferent?
Eyewitness Is Highly Unreliable
Pornography And The Register
The Register seems very switched on regarding beating paedophile raps and similar nasties. See for example Resistance To Interrogation In England Here is another offering.
Pornography And The Register II
A switched on lawyer is a good start.
Pornography And The Register III3
This is an important one with solid advice.
Suspect Identities - A History of Fingerprinting and Criminal Identification
"No two fingerprints are alike," or so it goes. For nearly a hundred years fingerprints have represented definitive proof of individual identity in our society. We trust them to tell us who committed a crime, whether a criminal record exists, and how to resolve questions of disputed identity.
But in Suspect Identities, Simon Cole reveals that the history of criminal identification is far murkier than we have been led to believe. Cole traces the modern system of fingerprint identification to the nineteenth-century bureaucratic state, and its desire to track and control increasingly mobile, diverse populations whose race or ethnicity made them suspect in the eyes of authorities. In an intriguing history that traverses the globe, taking us to India, Argentina, France, England, and the United States, Cole excavates the forgotten history of criminal identification--from photography to exotic anthropometric systems based on measuring body parts, from fingerprinting to DNA typing. He reveals how fingerprinting ultimately won the trust of the public and the law only after a long battle against rival identification systems.
As we rush headlong into the era of genetic identification, and as fingerprint errors are being exposed, this history uncovers the fascinating interplay of our elusive individuality, police and state power, and the quest for scientific certainty. Suspect Identities offers a necessary corrective to blind faith in the infallibility of technology, and a compelling look at its role in defining each of us.
Believe nothing until it is officially denied.
Talcum dog team leave red faces
Teaching dogs the smell of cocaine makes sense. If a cop steals the coke the training is not much use. Are they looking for a thief? Maybe. Did villains get away with it? Maybe. Should you believe a police man? NEVER.
Finger Print Evidence Is Not Good Enough [ 16 November 2007 ]
A Baltimore County judge has ruled that fingerprint evidence, a mainstay of forensics for nearly a century, is not reliable enough to be used against a homicide defendant facing a possible death sentence - a finding that national experts described yesterday as unprecedented and potentially far-reaching.
Look at the mug shot and decide whether he is guilty. It is fairly obvious.
Father Of DNA Evidence Calls For Database To Be Cut [ 11 September 2009 ] - broken link in 2014
On the 25th anniversary of his discovery of DNA fingerprinting, Sir Alec Jeffreys says innocent people should not be on database.
Technology is neutral. Politicians are evil.
Who set up The 9/11 Job? Not Osama for starters.
Who used it to destroy liberty? Bush, Blair and other fascists.
Rotherham's Pakistani Rape Investigation Was Very Incompetent [ 25th Aug 2014 ]
A juror was in the business of helping victims of rape in the aftermath. He says inter alia that the videos were barely audible, the interrogators were incompetent, the case was badly presented, the defence lawyers were abusive et cetera. He doesn't allege bad faith.
Memory Is Unreliable [ 12 December 2016 ]
Researchers at Warwick University showed that if people are told to repeatedly imagine a fictional event in their lives, around 50 per cent accepted that it did..........
The findings raise further doubts about the credibility of eyewitness statements used in court, and shed light on how people develop false beliefs.............
In the course of the studies, more than 400 people were asked to imagine a range of false events – including taking hot air balloon rides, playing pranks on a teacher, or creating havoc at a family wedding.
We do forget; we do misremember. That is before motives get involved.
Errors & omissions, broken links, cock ups, over-emphasis, malice [ real or imaginary ] or whatever; if you find any I am open to comment.
Email me at Mike Emery. All financial contributions are cheerfully accepted. If you want to keep it private, use my PGP Key. Home Page
Updated onMonday, 12 December 2016 14:14:12