CA: California Senate aims to limit ‘junk science’ in courtrooms

Source: apnews.com 1/27/22

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers on Wednesday moved to deter the use of what a legislator called “junk science” in the courtroom and give those convicted with questionable expert testimony a way out of prison.

Senators approved changing the state’s definition of false testimony to include expert court opinions based on flawed scientific research or outdated technology, or where a reasonable scientific dispute has emerged over its validity.

Expert opinions that aren’t based on bona fide research, peer-reviewed studies or other science would not satisfy the state’s requirements for admissible testimony.

The bill by Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener would allow people to appeal if they previously were convicted based on the discredited testimony.

“This bill gives judges stronger tools to prevent junk science from coming into our courtrooms,” Wiener said.

Read the 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.  
 

29 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Thank you enormous gay Jewish man. You are our savior.

A good step. How about eliminating junk science in the legislature as well?

Any idea if this would result in Static-99 being thrown out in all aspects since it is junk science and has never been peer reviewed? It’s literally being used to keep some people on the registry for life.

Does that include the junk science in Smith v. doe, way back when?

Some of these articles are good on here even this “Junk science” court type pansy justice type ordeal. Sure we have computers today but what is a computer. Is it more of an instrument to catch more with a Carnal offense or to make life easier for justice to be abused? I am sure that their is more people in jail with computer induced computer issues than say real boy touches girl issues if that’s the case.
Sure there’s good and bad in everything but who weighs out the good from the bad with all this “perverted justice… guess dateline can tell us about these set ups or are a lot of this registry a tumbling dice throw out the bait line to catch a fish. Wonder who goes fishing anymore in a court of law.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Kudos to Cali’s Senator Scott Wiener!! He has long been a supporter of truth & justice!! AND real facts, research, data, and science!!
👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

Seems like a lot of you guys are using handy wipes for dish towels and junk science can be a bit of a foggy rocky rocky road ice castle justice. Maybe one should wear a seee thru bra to understand the human brain or understand who’s screwing who in much of this court of justice cover-up today. Why are many even on lifetime probation? or does the law change every fiscal year? Never to late to uncover true justice or who is actually hiding true truth today or maybe some database has already find it out. Guess nobody covers up the truth today and convictions are more justifiable.

Should all say its time for the constitution to be revamped or even this registry. Hey didn”t we give women rights to vote with this “junk science” called man’s wisdom. Maybe one should even find out about the scandals of true American Justice? I’ve never went angle fishing before so I don’t know what angling is or assumed bribery even criminal intent would be in question.

If this bill passes, I would think it would also preclude the courts from imposing polygraphs, polygrphs being the ultimate junk science.

Great, let’s start with that stupid Static-99/R. That dumb “test” is literally the very definition of junk science.

I left voicemails with both Senators in the article to get them to understand the reality of junk science in courts and asked them to vote for the passage of the bill. People here should call their elected CA officials to vote for it too.

Trust the process!

If this passes, we can easily fight the junk used to keep up the registry. We can finally call a spade a spade.

The registry has no good data to back it up. All the good data says >5% will reoffend after 15-20 years. It’s kept alive through fear and political “good will.”

It’s ridiculous that courts will accept Static-99/R results many years after the assessment was done when, from what I understand, the tool itself states that it’s results are time-limited!

Junk bs was back in salem time. Just words!!! No proof.. The so call victims don’t need proof of be in a victim. It your job to not be a witch… But money is behind this sex registry… Here in Michigan we have 46000 people on the money list. Each one of us have too pay 50 dollars to the state till we reach 500 dollars 500 times 46000 people. You do the the math.But they keep adding more people each day. It a scam..someone is getting that money….

Wasn’t SCOTUS decision in Smith vs Doe based on Junk Science? Discredited “expert testimony”?

Obviously the CA State Senate cannot just vote Smith vs Doe out of existence…but shouldn’t the purpose of this bill, it’s objective, have some impact on laws that were enacted via the Smith vs Doe precedent? It allows for retrial of convictions that were handed down in part because of junk science.