Quote:
Originally Posted by Defender968
The way she behaved as well as the test(s) would lead me to believe there is a strong probability of guilt, and I don't have all the evidence in the case, but I also don’t believe in coincidences (and I do trust the system, it's not perfect but it also slants things in the favor of the accused very much so.) I've seen far more guilty go free than innocent people go to jail. And of course if you believe all the folks in prison who claim they’re innocent then we'd need no jails.
Of course in my line of work I suspect the worst of people, but I also usually have my suspicions confirmed by their actions.
|
I respect your experience - I have no background in such things. Still, I notice:
According to court documents, prosecutors learned last month that some of Todd Sommer’s untested tissue samples had been stored at San Diego Naval Medical Center. They were tested this month in Quebec and no arsenic was found and, as a result, contamination in previous tissue samples was possible.
(From the article, as linked by Kyobanim)
So, we have two sets of samples, one that shows arsenic, and one that doesn't. I see three possibilities:
Option One: Set 1 (with arsenic) is valid. Set 2 (without arsenic) is valid. That combination doesn't make sense.
Option Two: Set 1 (with arsenic) is contaminated, hence invalid). Set 2 (without arsenic) is valid. Hence, the murder did not occur.
Option Three: Set 1 (with arsenic) is valid. Set 2 (without arsenic) actually has arsenic, but the technician made an error and missed the poison.
Option 1: As I mention, this just doesn't make sense. How could 1 sample have it, and another not have it?
Option 2: The widow really isn't guilty.
Option 3: If I was the technician in a high-profile case, I think I would be extra careful. My lab procedure would be by-the-book.
You mention that you trust the system. I guess I see the system as merely a group of ordinary people. And people make mistakes. Sometimes they get lazy. Sometimes they take shortcuts, or have bad attitudes. Sometimes they just have bad days.
Now, let's look at those jurors. I've seen lots of people who can't make heads or tails of compound interest. I'd bet you've seen a great many who can't understand the concept of legal elements required to constitute a criminal offense. Are those jurors really capable of evaluating the evidence? I wonder. Your suggestion that many guilty people go free hints that we may be in agreement. At the least, if a guilty person is set free by a jury, then surely the converse can also occur.
Anyway, my inflation adjusted 2 cents worth...