Dubious Forensics

I Just got through looking at “Forcing Change in Forensic Science” (C&EN, May 12, 2014, page 10). A similar story appeared on PBS a year or two back that showed, in no uncertain terms, the lack of accurate scientific testimony in the courts.

In the case of PBS, the point was made that there are organizations that certify that one can be recognized as an scientific expert. The key ingredient in these cases seemed to be getting a few hundred dollars paid to the said organizations. Science seems to be about facts and is pretty inflexible about that. The members of these organizations displayed more flexibility than one might expect from a scientist, or so it was claimed by that show on PBS.

As the legal community quite often is enmeshed with the various levels of government, it would seem that the various folks in government would know that facts are typically inflexible. But in a country where the vote counts for a lot, perhaps those that get voted to public office must appeal to other folks that don’t understand, or perhaps wish to understand, the inflexibility of facts. That’s sort of profound if you think about it. And it explains a lot.

James G. Parsons
Rapid City, S.D.