Science Manual For US Judges

An anonymous reader writes "American court judges need to learn science. That's the message from the National Academies and the National Research Council, which today released the first new edition in 11 years of the Reference Manual of Scientific Evidence. It has new chapters about forensic science, mental health, and neuroscience, but unfortunately nothing about computer science. The manual is available as a free download and it's also online."

Comments

Just judges?

[Wowsers]

Not just judges that need science education, it's the politicians who seem to thrive on junk science and present it as fact. Politicians across the globe are dangerously uneducated, which makes them dangerous when making laws.

Re:Just judges?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not just judges that need science education, it's the politicians who seem to thrive on junk science and present it as fact. Politicians across the globe are dangerously uneducated, which makes them dangerous when making laws.

Politicians are a reflection of society. They always cater to the lowest common denominator.
Have a well educated civil society and automatically you'll get for the most part politicians that will ignore junk science.
Of course you'll always get the science denier etc.... but they will only infect their own stupidity and not other politicians.
So go fix your school system first, everything else flows from there.

Re:Just judges?

[hrvatska]

If a lot of those politicians spouting junk science instead started using science based reasoning they wouldn't get elected. The problem, unfortunately, isn't the politicians, it's their constituents. The politicians are a symptom of a greater problem.

Re:Just judges?

[somersault]

Don't you need to educate your politicians before they will be able to improve the school system?

Re:Just judges?

[Pieroxy]

You gotta start somewhere. The best way to start is at the source: The school system. How do you get to improve the school system with such uneducated politicians is the problem. But you can't focus on educating politicians. By the time you'll reach through their thick skulls, they'll be out of office and you have to start again with the newcomers.

Re:Just judges?

[roc97007]

This perhaps inadvertently brings up a good point -- whomever writes the manual has an unfair influence on the way the law is practiced.

Re:Just judges?

[Dr_Barnowl]

Advertising. Bill Hicks was right on the mark when he told all people working in marketing to "go kill yourself".

People want the good life, and they want it easy, and cheap, and now. Corporations are only too happy to sell them that dream, and promote the idea that you're entitled to shit on who you like to get it.

The real dream should be a future like Star Trek (ludicrous physics notwithstanding). Sure, you see the elite working hard on starships, but imagine a future where technology has solved every material need of the human race - they're working hard because they love it, not because they are forced to by economic forces. I want a future where I get to do the job I love for the hours I want, see my friends a lot more, and spend more time with my daughter - because I don't have to worry about having to live on the street and eat garbage. And I'm fairly certain that it's possible within my lifetime, as long as the corporations don't continue to get their way - alas, they probably will.

Re:Just judges?

[mrxak]

Believe it or not, government is not always the answer to all of society's problems, education least of all. Parents need to take an interest in their children's educations. It's pretty much a local issue, anyway, so start going to PTA meetings and lobby your town selectmen or mayor. Heck, run for your local school board if they're incompetent.

Re:Just judges?

[penix1]

It's pretty much a local issue, anyway, so start going to PTA meetings and lobby your town selectmen or mayor. Heck, run for your local school board if they're incompetent.

In a society that is in debt up to its tits, and both parents need to work to make ends meet, that isn't going to happen. Real wages have remained flat but the standard of living has continued to rise. The difference between the two is the debt we are seeing. As long as that debt is overwhelming, you will see less and less participation in "normal" society especially politics.

Besides, the way most politicians are treated (at least in the US) it is little wonder anyone wants to run. So you wind up with the sociopath in office because nobody else wants it.

Re:Just judges?

[Moryath]

Look at Texas as a great example. Last 20 years of Republican rule, their schools have fallen in rank and in ability every year. Rick Perry packed the educational boards with a bunch of religious fundies, doing his level best to make it even worse.

And of course, at the same time as they are complaining about how much it costs to go to college, they're flipping the middle finger to higher education and slashing funding across the board. 10 years ago, 50% of state college funding came from the state, today it's less than 20% (and they wonder why tuition went up!).

Meanwhile, the "solution" generally proposed is to require constant continuing education and certification requirements on teachers... which means for a job that doesn't pay well to start with, they're spending a buttload more time and money just staying certified.

And we wonder why people don't stay in teaching...

Re:Just judges?

[Moryath]

Parental involvement is needed. This we can agree on.

HOWEVER:
- When your government is insisting on "saving money" by bumping up grade school numbers to 40 kids in a classroom and no teachers' aides to help keep order? PROBLEM.
- When your government is telling schools desperate for basic building maintenance and desperate to hire enough teachers to make ends meet "fuck you, cut your budget so that we can cut property taxes", PROBLEM.
- When your government is telling teachers "fuck you, you're just a glorified babysitter, what do you do anyways?" - PROBLEM.
- When your government's idea of "accountability" is "fuck the poor, we don't care what the public schools are like, all our kids go to private school anyways" - PROBLEM.

Re:Just judges?

[black soap]

I think the political debates ought to be preceded by an "academic decathlon" style competition, televised, and their scores commented on by smart people. At least one of the events should be "can you do your own taxes without an accountant," to make it clear that tax laws are too complicated. And rather than speaking/interviewing (we already know politicians can do that), there should be a practical skills competition - can they change a tire, build a treehouse, and balanace a checkbook?

A Welcome Update.

[ApepUK]

I'm certainly glad to see an update even if there has been a delay of 11 years. I'm not sure I agree with the OP that it should've(?) contained a section on computer science. Science is a vast field on it's own with many disciplines, hence the seperation of certain subjects such as mental health and neuroscience. I consider Computer Science a vast field in it's own right and therefore should have it's own reference manual. Within the Information & Communication Technology world there are also a large number of disiciplines, which would probably need more than suitable coverage in terms applying law and may not receive properly if it is bundled with non-related sciences - there is always the risk of subjects perhaps being watered down a little too much. Still, it's a positive step forward and must be recognised in order to encourage further reference manuals to be produced - and hopefully updated more often!

Re:Right after...

[Anonymous Coward]

Every judge in this country must read the Constitution, then there needs to be a person in the judges chambers that smacks the judge in the head once for every time the judge violated that section he is reading.

The trouble is that the Constitution is subject to human interpretation. I've seen essays on how the semicolons in the Constitution meant something different than they do today for example. Or just look at the debates here on /. about the GPL. The exact same paragraph will have a different interpretation from different people. If it wasn't a problem then why did RMS have to publish a FAQ about the GPL?

Unfortunately, the written word isn't as black and white as folks wish it were. That's why there are judges - to settle disputes about what the law says and means and what the intent is. Then, if judges rule contrary to what the legislatures meant, the legislatures will rewrite the law - maybe.

Now what we need...

[roc97007]

...is a book on "most common prior art" for the patent office.

Correction

[jtseng]

"Americans in general need to learn more science." There - fixed it for you.

computer science no they need IT / networking / wi

[Joe_Dragon]

computer science is way to theory based for the court room / juries and will not help in lot's of cases.

They need manuals for
Basics of networks
General IT,
Basics of the internet
How a cable system works (mainly on the IP address side on how it's get it tied to a user and how about how much of the network is shared),
List of other IT computer based court cases
How spyware, virus, and other stuff like it works
How people can fall into popup traps
How being off by one letter, going to a website that go hacked and so on can lead to a pron site that is hard to get out of.
How IT can be stuck with old software / out of date stuff due to others not paying for updates.
Wifi networks and how easy it can be to hack some of them.
Fake antispyware and anitvirus software.
and others as well.

All you need is a jury of your PEERS.

[trout007]

The key word being PEERS. Someone with equal training and ability.

If you are suing a doctor for malpractice the jury should consist of people with enough medical knowledge to judge the case.

Re:All you need is a jury of your PEERS.

[silas_moeckel]

As apposed to the current system where anybody that might have an understanding of an applicable technical subject is removed from the jury pool. Having all doctors is a pretty bad idea, so is removing anybody that can see through an expert witnesses BS.

Judicial certifications?

[FriendlyPrimate]

Seems like Judges should be required to get special training and certifications (i.e. something similar to Bar Exams on specialized topics) before they are allowed to preside over cases requiring specialized knowledge like copyright, patents, medical malpractice, computer science, etc.

Re:The scientific mind is dangerous to a lawyer

[nomadic]

"sketchy evidence, confused testimony, and irrelevant but nice-sounding rhetoric."

Funny, when it comes to matter outside their specialty, engineers seem to be unusually vulnerable to those things. Ever wonder why an unusual number of engineers are creationists, or AGW deniers, or terrorists?