Jurors Beware: State Crime Labs Incentivized to Help Falsely Convict

Admin

Many jurors are led to believe that evidence and results provided to them through state crime labs are objective data on which they can rely in determining the fate of the defendant. Earlier this year, we discussed the crime lab scandal at the Hinton Lab in Jamaica Plain in Massachusetts, in which a chemist who was socially wooed by prosecutors falsified lab results in favor of conviction for years, calling 40,000 convictions into question. Jurors should be aware that there are even stronger incentives for state crime labs across the country to help prosecutors secure convictions—their financial stability is tied to convictions. In this article Police State USA shares the results of a study by Roger Koppl and Meghan Sacks in the journal Criminal Justice Ethics. Full Article

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

4 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Many of us know for a fact, beyond the shadow of a doubt that exculpatory forensic computer evidence is “lost”, modified or otherwise scrubbed from hard drives in order to get a conviction. The whole damned system is corrupt.

0
Reply

In my case, the prosecution in Riverside took almost a year after my arrest just to provide their evidence to my attorney. When they did, I was shown the evidence and it was altered and incomplete. No one should believe this is an isolated case, it is far, far from it.

0
Reply

That is What the Innocence Project is For…& They Have a Certain Criteria to Even Qualify for help Not to Mention the Waiting List @ Least 2 Years…PFFfft! & Kalifornia Attorneys That Only work in 1 part of the state And Not The Northern Half ? CA MEANS CA Not Norcal Not Socal…CALIFORNIA Period. Or So 1 Would Think…Not So! Southern CA Lawyers are Fish Out Of Water OR Scared In Northern Ca. & Visa Versa…I found Out The Hard Way,,,I Asked them ALL & a Few Not In the BAR…..I Have Come to believe that BAR stands for “Bad Attorney Referrals”….Hahahahahaha,,Just Jokin’ but Not By Much!!

0
Reply

ANY TIME YOU WANNA SUE ANY CA COUNTY For ANYTHING RSO Related I’ll PUT MY NAME ON IT !!! NO PROBLEM We Can Start With Who Ever You Want.

0
Reply