Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (82789)	6/23/2000 5:15:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 108807

brees, I really don't follow this closely, but my understanding is that most of the people who get off death row these days do it on the basis of DNA evidence. This isn't absolutely conclusive proof that they didn't do it, of course, but it's usually pretty convincing. Cheers, Dan.

To: one_less who wrote (82789)	6/23/2000 6:22:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 108807

Actually, nowadays with DNA testing you often CAN prove actual innocence. If a man is accused of rape and you can show that by DNA testing the sperm in the woman came from a completely different man, and she is clear that only one person raped her and the sperm in her came from the rapist (have to be careful that it isn't her boyfriend's sperm from the night before), then you can be very sure that the accused person didn't rape her. Similarly with DNA testing of blood found at a crime scene, if you find, for example, blood under the nails of the victim. Problem is, for most public defense cases (which is the vast number of murder suspects -- the OJ Simpsons are few and far between) the state doesn't provide money for DNA testing. And if the police think they have their man or woman, they sure aren't going to voluntarily risk upsetting the apple cart by doing the testing at their expense. So it doesn't get done until some Innocence Project, usually from a law school, comes along and is willing to take the case.

To: one_less who wrote (82789)	6/23/2000 6:26:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Here's one specific case. pbs.org BTW, Elizabeth Loftus was interviewed for this. She is an amazing person. Has done incredible work on eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony is the best kind, right? Dead wrong. Memories can be created, and what is truly scary is that as far as brain function is concerned, a created memory is identical within the brain to the memory of an event actually experienced. So the level of belief in each is identical. One can pass a polygraph test because the created memory is just as real as the actual experience memory. Fascinating stuff.