Slashdot Mirror


US Dismantles Forensic Science Commission (washingtonpost.com)

hondo77 writes a report via Washington Post: Thought the Trump Administration's war on science was just about climate change? Think again. "Attorney General Jeff Sessions will end a Justice Department partnership with independent scientists to raise forensic science standards and has suspended an expanded review of FBI testimony across several techniques that have come under question, saying a new strategy will be set by an in-house team of law enforcement advisers," reports Washington Post. The National Commission on Forensic Science, "jointly led by Justice and the Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has prompted several changes," including "new accrediting and ethical codes for forensic labs and practitioners" and the FBI abandoning "its four-decade-long practice of tracing bullets to a specific manufacturer's batch through chemical analyses after its method were scientifically debunked." "The availability of prompt and accurate forensic science analysis to our law enforcement officers and prosecutors is critical to integrity in law enforcement, reducing violent crime, and increasing public safety," Sessions said in the statement. "We applaud the professionalism of the National Commission on Forensic Science and look forward to building on the contributions it has made in this crucial field."

35 of 281 comments (clear)

  1. I can't post the title without flaming by chromaexcursion · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm ashamed to be an American.

    1. Re:I can't post the title without flaming by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seriously. Who the fuck was calling for lowered standards in forensic science? I'm to the point where if there's a lobbying group for it, I assume the GOP is going to be for it. If it's something sane people really like, the GOP is going to be against it. But this? I'm honestly caught off guard.

      At this rate, I can only assume that next week, the GOP will announce that the official guidelines for miles, pounds, feet, and gallons are "too restrictive to business" and the new standard for how much gas will be in a gallon will be "whatever the fuck exxon says it is, peasant."

    2. Re:I can't post the title without flaming by LetterRip · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seriously. Who the fuck was calling for lowered standards in forensic science?

      Private prisons. They lobby for anything that results in higher and longer incarceration rates.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

      https://www.usatoday.com/story...

    3. Re:I can't post the title without flaming by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Private prisons. They lobby for anything that results in higher and longer incarceration rates.

      That's the flip side of this. It's also about making sure there's enough "play" in the forensics to convict someone innocent or exonerate someone corrupt.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:I can't post the title without flaming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seriously. Who the fuck was calling for lowered standards in forensic science?

      Private prisons. They lobby for anything that results in higher and longer incarceration rates.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

      https://www.usatoday.com/story...

      I'm sick and fucking tired of hearing about business models that can only "grow" only by crossing the ethical line. Fuck private prisons and their reasons to destroy the advances we've made in forensic science. You want profits? Then create business that benefits members of society instead of finding more creative ways to imprison them. If this kind of bullshit lobbying continues, you'll be behind bars for jaywalking, because it helps feed someone's bottom line.

  2. Re:Trump Advisor Carter Page - Russian Agent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    What is there to believe?

    It's public knowledge that Trump advisor Carter Page is a Russian secret agent.

    So treasonous...

  3. Re:Trump Advisor Carter Page - Russian Agent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For Trump supporters and most Republicans, it's always Trump/party before country. No matter what issue.

  4. Re:Fake news by TimSSG · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It is fake news; the commission is due to expire and they are seeking comment from the public on the best way to proceed. Tim S.

    I declare this news as fake, on the grounds it's too absurd to be real. Please let this be fake.

  5. Hillbillies, right wing conspiracy theorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    and two-bit crooked real estate salesmen are now running the US government.

  6. Back to divination by goombah99 · · Score: 5, Funny

    IN unrelated news the FBI formed a Divination unit that applies forensic goat entrails reading to predict future crimes. Jeff sessions was quoted as saying, "Liberal Judges have long prevented the proven science of witch drowning as a standard of guilt. Everyone knows Witches float, it's so simple to prevent occult crimes. Now we can."

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Back to divination by locater16 · · Score: 3, Funny

      No no no no nooo. To establish the guilt of witches they must burn, but we can't burn the innocent. So we have to establish that they are, in fact, witches before burning them. Now, it is a well established fact that witches are made of wood, which is why they burn. Now you could try to make a bridge out of the alleged witch to establish guilt, but bridges can be made of other things. But wood floats! So if the alleged witch floats you have established guilt and may thus burn the witch. But should a pond or other large body of water not be readily available comparing the weight of the accused to that which also floats, such as a duck, is acceptable. And if the accused does indeed weigh as much as a duck, why then guilt has CLEARLY been established!

  7. statement from NDAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Statement from National District Attorney Association

    http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/NDAA%20Statement%20on%20Expiration%20of%20National%20Commission%20on%20Forensic%20Science.pdf

    The Commission lacked adequate representation from the state and local practitioner community,
    was dominated by the defense community, and failed to produce work products of significance for
    the forensic science community. Very few of the recommendations from the Commission were
    adopted and signed by the previous Attorney General during its existence. Those that were signed,
    such as universal accreditation, had already begun to develop organically within the forensic science
    community as accepted best practices, thus replicating ongoing work and wasting taxpayer dollars.

  8. Basic liberals propaganda by lucm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    No this is just some biased news reporting as usual.

    From the article:

    In a statement Monday, Sessions said he would not renew the National Commission on Forensic Science, a roughly 30-member advisory panel of scientists, judges, crime lab leaders, prosecutors and defense lawyers chartered by the Obama administration in 2013.

    First, they do not "dismantle" the commission, they just don't renew its mandate. Second, it was a mostly idle project launched 4 years ago by Obama, it's not a long-standing institution of law enforcement.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
    1. Re:Basic liberals propaganda by lucm · · Score: 2

      uhm, and "not renewing its mandate" does not equal "dismantling" it how?

      Because they mean different things.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    2. Re:Basic liberals propaganda by Ly4 · · Score: 5, Informative

      but rather a long list of things the cops shouldn't be allowed to use in court.

      Like
          - bad arson science (see the Willingham case)
          - unsupported bite-mark evidence (see the Krone case)
          - stating that fingerprints are absolutely unique (see the Mayfield case).

      What's wrong with requiring techniques used to court to be supported by evidence that they work?

    3. Re: Basic liberals propaganda by nbauman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Basically they're trying to limit what the expert witnesses for the prosecution can say. Those people are not scientists, they're defense lobbyists.

      The courts have always limited what expert witnesses could say. It's called "Admissibility."

      Start with Frye v. United States, which applied to a criminal case, where the Supreme Court ruled that lie detector tests couldn't be admitted as evidence because there was no scientific evidence for them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      That was superseded by Daubert, a civil case, where the judge decided to throw out evidence of birth defects against a corporation,

      Read the article again:

      In September, a White House science panel called on courts to question the admissibility of four heavily used techniques, including firearms tracing, saying claims about their reliability had not been scientifically proved. The Justice Department last year also announced a wider review of testimony by experts across several disciplines after finding that nearly all FBI experts for years overstated and gave scientifically misleading testimony about two techniques the FBI Laboratory long championed: the tracing of crime-scene hairs based on microscopic examinations and of bullets based on chemical composition.

      The issue here isn't whether the commission gets renewed. The issue here is that this is a prosecutor's wish list to keep giving juries unproven and disproven "scientific" evidence with the authority of "FBI agents."

      These prosecutors are the same ones who ( while they smoke cigarettes) insist that marijuana is so dangerous that users should go to jail.

      They want to be free to use bullshit evidence because that way they can get convictions, and advance their careers, whether the defendant is innocent or guilty. DNA testing exposed that whole fraud.

      At one time there were intelligent, principled conservatives who understood logic and science, and were even committed to justice, not convictions, and sometimes the weight of the evidence would convince them to change their minds. There were also liberals like that.

      Today, as Chris Mooney documented in The Republican War on Science, some of the Democrats are ignoring the scientific evidence, but almost all the Republicans have followed the Republican party line.

      Think about it. The Trump administration rejects global warming, and hasn't even hired scientific advisers. How can they be competent to understand the scientific validity of criminal evidence?

      Sadly, it's a waste of time to argue with you, because you have your position and I don't think any evidence would convince you. I'm writing this for the benefit of the other readers of Slashdot who want a better understanding of the issues.

    4. Re:Basic liberals propaganda by mvdwege · · Score: 2

      First, they do not "dismantle" the commission, they just don't renew its mandate.

      Semantics. The end result is the same: no commission.

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
  9. Re:Trump Advisor Carter Page - Russian Agent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "What type of moron believe's this narrative? "

    The type that presses the apostrophe key the instant he sees the letter s?

  10. fake news by ooloorie · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sessions isn't "dismantling" anything. The commission was created in 2013 and was supposed to do its job by 2017. It apparently has done that, Sessions has thanked them. The Trump administration is now deciding what to do next.

    Calling this "ordering the Justice Dept. to end forensic science commission" or "dismantling forensic science commission", as if Trump or Sessions had taken extraordinary steps to kill the commission, is tendentious, politically motivated b.s. that reflects badly on the Washington Post and the submitter.

  11. And Stone and Kushner and Flynn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And Stone coordinating his campaign with hacker Guccifer, Manasfort? Millions of dollars putting Putin agents in power in democracies.

    Even Kushner sneaked the Russian ambassador into Trump tower, shortly followed by a director of VneshEconomBank (a Putin controlled bank previously known for bailing out Putin projects and funding legal defenses of Russian spies)... but it's all innocent, VneshEconomBank says it was just a commercial meeting regarding Kushners property interests (which would be an illegal violation of sanctions). Kushner says its totally innocent meeting with VneshEconomBank in his role as temporary acting State Dept, making connections to Putin. (i.e. he's totally aware the bank is a Putin front!). Neither story adds up.

    Perhaps you think I'm kidding, but no, this is sadly true:
    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/27/politics/kushner-meeting-russian-banker-tied-to-putin/index.html

    Flynn? Secret meetings with Russian ambassadors, was to have fulfilled Putin's promise to Erdogan on extraditing a US cleric to Turkey. The go-to man for the smaller deals.

    But I think you're rather missing the bigger picture. Look at their recent earnings declarations. Kushner is claimed to have assets of 750 million, yet income of 100k. That doesn't make sense. When I dig through their public accounts none of the numbers add up. They are 2 orders of magnitude out of best estimates. Trump still hasn't release his tax returns, only leaking a two page sheet from 2005, which was probably the last time the numbers looks plausible.

    So Trump is a conman, and he'll take apart forensics, he'll take apart accounting standards bodies, he'll undermine ethics groups. It's not that Trump is some string puppet of Putin's. It's more that he's a crook, and Putin is a fellow crook, and there is a mutual interest.

    Look at the raid in Syria. Russian was pre-informed about it, they in turn warned Assad, all the fighter jets were removed, there were two helicopters placed in the center of the runways for the photo-op, but those helicopters aren't normally parked blocking a runway! Trump blows up some tarmac and some concrete. Who the fuck would do that? Why would you do that? You know there will be zero useful assets to destroy if you inform Putin, yet you inform Putin.

  12. bias? by lucm · · Score: 5, Informative

    From the article:
    The commission jointly led by Justice and the Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has prompted several changes.

    You:
    mostly idle

    Your bias is showing.

    Those 30 people have made a total of 20 recommendations since 2013. Here's the latest one:

    The Attorney General should direct the Bureau of Justice Statistics to create a proposal for the development of a nationally representative survey to determine forensic capabilities for those who write reports and offer testimony within federal, state and local law-enforcement agencies and for medical examiner and coroner offices. The survey instrument should be developed in collaboration with the relevant stakeholders organizations by the next commission meeting.

    1/2 page.

    You want more? Here's the 2nd latest recommendation, made ONE YEAR before.

    Proficiency testing is required of all accredited FSSPs. As a recognized quality control tool, it is the view of the Commission that proficiency testing should also be implemented by nonaccredited FSSPs in disciplines where proficiency tests are available from external organizations.

    That's it. The entire corpus of that immensely valuable recommendation spans 7 pages; of those 7 pages, 4 are an appendix describing terms like "Accreditation".

    That commission is a big joke. See, there's a webcast of their meetings.

    https://www.nist.gov/topics/fo...

    Huge waste of time.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
    1. Re:bias? by lucm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ok. Clearly you need more evidence, so why don't you look at the webcast of their meeting.

      Fast-forward to 47:22, and see the lady asking the crowd to pick which cards should be turned over, and then she gets annoyed because nobody gives a shit about her triangles.

      https://www.nist.gov/topics/fo...

      Tell me how that helps improving forensics science. This is merely a bunch of people having their 10 minutes of babbling on the record with zero value for the taxpayers.

      Somehow I suspect that if that commission had been created by Republicans you'd be the first to denounce it.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
  13. Re:MOD PARENT UP by someone1234 · · Score: 2

    This suggestion is hillarious. Instead of Russian cronies, you prefer a crone?

    --
    Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
  14. Re:fake news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Technically correct; the article notes the commission's term ends April 23rd. But what's the case for ending it?

    As the article also notes:

    "In suspending reviews of past testimony and the development of standards for future reporting, “the department has literally decided to suspend the search for the truth,” said Peter S. Neufeld, co-founder of the Innocence Project, which has reported that nearly half of 349 DNA exonerations involved misapplications of forensic science."

    There's verifiable evidence of prosecutions based on faulty forensic data. There are extant forensic practices that are not scientifically valid, such as bite mark patterns. The commission aims to instill scientific rigor into forensic lab practices and resistance from "crime lab practitioners and defense community representatives on the commission had reduced it to “a think tank,”.

    That's not an argument for ending the commission. That's an argument for replacing the members interfering with its function. But scientific rigor apparently isn't what Jeff Sessions wants.

  15. Re:Every little thing by s1d3track3D · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Yes, here, here!

    On the plus side, illegal immigration is at the lowest it's been in 2 decades

    Not just illegal immigration, people are avoiding traveling to the US in general (Interest in travel to the US has "fallen off a cliff" since Donald Trump’s election - https://www.theguardian.com/tr...) Good! There are enough people here, we don’t need anymore, we’ll make that tourist money up in other ways. Silicon valley tech companies are avoiding letting employees travel to outside the US for fear they won’t be able to get back in. Good! show them with actions it’s better to only hire US workers. I mean what have immigrants ever done for silicon valley and the US anyway?! https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...

    the economy is up by 20%

    %20? sure, I follow you brother no citation needed. Either way, great, nothing wrong there. ("Any improvement for the consumer will be balanced out by the higher value of the dollar," Mr. Payne forecasts. http://www.csmonitor.com/Busin...)

    and we made a strong-but-measured move in Syria which has garnered praise from many world leaders.

    Yes, strength! (Trump's Syria Strike Was Unconstitutional and Unwise - https://www.theatlantic.com/po...)

    Hey don't forget it's not just Syria, we are showing our strength all over the world! (civilian deaths - more than 1,000 in March alone - that have come directly as the result of the Trump administration’s other reckless military campaigns across the Middle East over the past few weeks. - https://www.theguardian.com/co...) Yes, this is great! The heavy handed tactics accusations thrown at Hillary which would lead us into war, well now Trump has done them so it’s ok, yeah! We’re #1 we’re #1!

    positive effect on relations and negotiations with Iran, N. Korea, and China.

    Yes, for sure because they respect a useless reckless show of force over keeping their trade deals in tact.

    Limiting illegal immigration should eventually bubble up into more jobs

    Yup, I’m pretty psyched, I’m preparing for my new job! It’s at a nice outdoor location in sunny fields actually. Purportedly it reaches about 100F so I should get a good tan out of it to boot! The hours will be refreshing, I will be working from 5AM to 6PM and I’m working with nature, picking fruit, I think I can have a radio with me and I’m making $15 per hour! Great, looking forward to it! The other benefit is I'll be able to take some fruit home in my bag since I won't be able to afford it anymore at the supermarket.

    Or is it just another example of government waste?

    Yeah, i think it was one of those stupid "Obama liberal biased" attempts to help brown people not get railroaded by local law enforcement practices, good riddance I say!

  16. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  17. Re:fake news by ooloorie · · Score: 2

    Bullshit, you marked me foe some time back because I wrote something critical of one of your little cheerleading pieces on Trump after the end of the primaries.

    I have marked you a foe because I think you are are an idiot and have been for as long as I have been on Slashdot (likely longer than you). "Foe" is a holdover from the time when marking people as such actually let you downrank them out of existence so you wouldn't see their crap at all (a feature that has sadly disappeared).

    As for Trump, when I say "I didn't support him", I simply mean that I didn't vote for him. I certainly have defended him against unwarranted attacks and attempts at character assassination. And so far, Trump hasn't done anything that particularly bothers me. On the other hand, I certainly don't hide the fact that I utterly despise Hillary and have for more than a decade, for her corruption, her lies, her opportunistic homophobia, and her incompetence. That's why I voted for Obama. It's also why I left the Democratic party last year and became an independent.

    And to be crystal clear, if the election took place today, I probably would vote for Trump, because although I still don't like him, he has turned out to be less bad than expected, while Hillary, her supporters, and the Democratic party have behaved deplorably.

    Does that clarify what "I didn't support him" mean? Or do you need me to draw you a map?

    teabaggers

    Who knew Republicans were so much fun.

  18. Re:Trump Advisor Carter Page - Russian Agent by Imrik · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't leave the Democrats out of this grouping, they're just as much party/anti-Trump before country.

  19. Say what? by corwinsr · · Score: 2

    No. "US" didn't. Trump and his incompetent embarrassment of an administration did. Just one more step on their way to becoming cartoon villains. Don't put this on the more than half of us that never wanted him or his minions anywhere near the levers of power.

  20. Re:Trump Advisor Carter Page - Russian Agent by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 2

    Wow. I'm a little surprised the hive mind here is promoting these kinds of wild conspiracy theories.

    --
    "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
    --- Jerry Garcia
  21. Re: Trump Advisor Carter Page - Russian Agent by PoopJuggler · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nice try, Putin.

  22. Re:Trump Advisor Carter Page - Russian Agent by ooloorie · · Score: 2

    For most party members, it's always their party before country. No matter what issue.

    There, FTFY. See, both parties are the same in that regard. It's because in order to become a party member, you really have to be a believer that your party holds the truth.

  23. Re: Trump Advisor Carter Page - Russian Agent by jwhyche · · Score: 2

    That is "Mr. Putin" to you! :)

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  24. We HAVE to start cutting programs... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

    Last fiscal year, the US Federal Government spent $1.423 trillion more than it brought in (source: US Department of Treasury). There are approximately 140 million taxpayers. This represents a DEFICIT spending $10,160 per taxpayer - spending above and beyond income. It is more than all the Federal Income tax paid! We would have to literally more than double the current Federal tax rate for all taxpayers to cover our deficit spending...

    Or, we start cutting things that are outside the domain of the Federal Government, and scale back on spending. It's either increase revenue or cut spending - but it has to be done. We cannot keep blowing over $4 billion dollars a day in deficit spending (that is $29 per day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year, per taxpayer).

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  25. Re:False equivalency by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 2

    I disagree with that assessment. It was the Democrats who changed Senate rules to get around filibusters (which, to be fair, the GOP is now abusing as well). The Democrats have gerrymandered and are trying to subvert the Electoral College at the state level by getting states to pledge their votes to the winner of the popular vote instead of the vote in their state, because that is to their advantage.

    Regardless of your feelings on our institutions, it's clear that both parties will abuse or subvert them when it suits them to do so. You think the Democrats are loyal to institutions overall because you like the particular institutions they defend.

    --
    Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.