The American legal system assumes that innocent people don’t confess to crimes they didn’t commit. It also assumes that eyewitness testimony is reliable and that jurors are impartial even though scientific research shows otherwise. Therein lies the cause of many wrongful convictions.
“The legal system is resistant to change and resistant to paying attention to scientific research,” Adam Benforado, author of the book Unfair: The New Science of Criminal Injustice, tells Wired magazine. You will find the informative story here.
Reblogged this on FORENSICS in FOCUS @ CSIDDS | News and Trends and commented:
Whoa. Now this post gets right to the point. A more PC phrase would be “CJ” social sciences making legal inroads to assumptions of guilt and innocence. Coerced confessions and incentivized eyewitnesses lead to wrongful convictions.
Scientific illiteracy is only one of the things wrong with the justice system, but this article hits that nail squarely on the head. However, the problem goes way beyond just false confessions and biased jurors. The basic nature of “evidence” has become steadily, increasingly scientific. This leaves us with a justice system that not only refuses to acknowledge new scientific understandings, but also places defendants at the mercy of so-called “experts.”