tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post6604861326167221858..comments2024-02-24T05:19:10.949-05:00Comments on Durham-in-Wonderland: The Times: DNA Exonerates (Except When It Doesn't)kcjohnson9http://www.blogger.com/profile/09625813296986996867noreply@blogger.comBlogger109125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-839413744425089462007-02-01T18:45:00.000-05:002007-02-01T18:45:00.000-05:00I have no brief either way on the Durham case and ...I have no brief either way on the Durham case and it appears Nifong committed legal malpractice if not worse.<br /> However, too often the exculpatory value of DNA evidence - usually, the lack of DNA - gets transmogrified into "proving innocence." It only "proves" that your DNA was not found there. It does not, in fact, "prove" you are innocent of the crime, or even "prove" you didn't leave DNA at the scene. It merely proves there is no DNA evidence against you.<br /> Of course, it's not necessary to leave behind DNA to accomplish rape or sexual assault or gross sexual imposition or whatever definition of sexual assault is used. Even if DNA is left behind, it's not always detected or gathered by investigators.<br /> Fingerprints are a similar form of physical evidence: their absence does not "prove" that a certain suspect is innocent of the crime. It simply means there is no fingerprint evidence against him. It doesn't even "prove" the suspect did not leave fingerprints at the scene. <br /> It's a form of negative evidence speaking for innocence, not positive evidence or proof of innocence.<br /> Some types of evidence can prove innocence; an alibi that holds up can prove a suspect could not have committed the crime he's charged with.<br /> The lack of DNA evidence from a suspect at a crime scene argues for his innocence but it cannot, by definition, prove it. <br /> While it is unlikely that any of the Duke students could have raped the dancer yet have none of their DNA show up on her panties, it sure as heck is possible.<br /> I have little doubt in the Duke case the prosecution has little to go on anymore.<br /> But innocence presumed is different than innocence proven.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-49678378658591881622007-02-01T18:31:00.000-05:002007-02-01T18:31:00.000-05:00I have no brief either way on the Durham case and ...I have no brief either way on the Durham case and it appears Nifong committed legal malpractice if not worse.<br /> However, too often the exculpatory value of DNA testing gets transmogrified into "proving innocence." It only "proves" that your DNA was not found there. It does not, in fact, "prove" you are innocent of the crime, or even "prove" you didn't leave DNA at the scene. It merely proves there is no DNA evidence against you.<br /> In rape cases, of course, it's not necessary to leave behind DNA to accomplish rape or sexual assault or gross sexual imposition or whatever definition of rape is used. Even if DNA is left behind by a suspect, it's not always detected or gathered by investigators.<br /> Fingerprints are a similar form of physical evidence: their absence does not "prove" that a certain suspect is innocent of the crime. It simply means there is no fingerprint evidence against said suspect. It doesn't even "prove" the suspect did not leave fingerprints at the scene. It just "proves" that there is no fingerprint evidence against the suspect. It's a form of negative evidence toward innocence, not positive evidence or proof of innocence.<br /> Innocence presumed is not innocence proven. Some types of evidence can prove innocence; an alibi that holds up can prove a suspect could not have committed the crime he's charged with.<br /> There's no doubt that the lack of DNA evidence from a suspect at a crime scene tends to argue for the innocence of the suspect. But such lack cannot, by definition, prove his innocence. <br /> While it is unlikely that any of the Duke students could have raped the dancer yet have none of their DNA show up on her panties, it sure as heck is possible. <br /> I have little doubt in the Duke case the prosecution has little to go on anymore.<br /> Proving innocence is a pretty tall order, after all.<br /> O.J., for example, enjoyed the presumption of innocence, and was declared innocent - well, not guilty - of killing his ex-wife and her friend. But many still doubt that his innocence was proven.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-46413224646528156642007-02-01T12:31:00.000-05:002007-02-01T12:31:00.000-05:00Note, I am not a Duke alumn. However...
I agree w...Note, I am not a Duke alumn. However...<br /><br />I agree with the poster above, the best way to wake up the school is to shut down donations. This is a metric that a Board of Trustees can and do look at. They really don't see the out of control faculty, etc. They see just a couple of important metrics, such as: school rank; number and quality of applications; and donations. Esp. donations. And because they hire and fire college presidents, the later listen to them. <br /><br />Secondly, the most likely legal causes of action against the school would be some sort of negligence. For a negligence claim, you need: duty; breach; proximate cause; and damages. <br /><br />The duty is that owed a college to its students, esp. after taking their money. I would think that innocent until proven guilty, etc. would qualify as part of duty. Also that police charges or acccusations would not affect grades and that the school would guarantee a safe environment for those students involved, esp. until proven guilty. <br /><br />If those are some of the duties owed a school to its students by taking their money, etc., then the breach is obvious. Throwing kids out of school merely for being charged with such crimes would be breach. As would allowing profs to flunk LAX students. Indeed, the actions of the Group of 88 faculty, being employees of the school, could be attributed to the school too. So, after taking their money, the school provided an extremely hostile environment for the LAX students. <br /><br />Proximate Cause is a fancy way of saying that the breach was a/the major factor causing the damages. <br /><br />And damages would include the mental anguish, as well as all those attorneys' fees. And because it was esp. egregious, I would expect that some sort of punitive damages might also be available.Bruce Haydenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10815293023158025662noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-18922130027627025162007-01-30T03:50:00.000-05:002007-01-30T03:50:00.000-05:00C4 12:22AM,
A sample size of 30 is considered ade...C4 12:22AM,<br /><br />A sample size of 30 is considered adequate. It just raises the MOE at a given confidence level.<br /><br />What statistics can tell you is if a result is unusual given a normal (or known) distribution.<br /><br />Now maybe the boys did earn Fs. OTOH what are the odds of two LAX players (known to be academically good to outstanding, because of who they are and team rqmts) both failing?<br /><br />Statistics doesn't tell you if it is right or wrong. What it does tell you is that the case deserves closer scrutiny. <br /><br />Or as Demming would say: time to look for special causes.<br /><br />Well the real world has been kind. We do suspect a special cause.M. Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09508934110558197375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-39652424402360755182007-01-30T03:23:00.000-05:002007-01-30T03:23:00.000-05:00I think it says something that James Coleman serve...I think it says something that James Coleman serves as a faculty advisor on the "North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence." I think while we note all the hypocrites associated with this case; we can also remember not everyone was. As they state on their web site, "While people of colr and those with few financial resources are more likely to be wrongfully convicted, no one is exempt.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-16055262001670631072007-01-30T01:34:00.000-05:002007-01-30T01:34:00.000-05:00Thousands have written and emailed Brodheas, Steel...Thousands have written and emailed Brodheas, Steel and the board to secure committments for the school to accept responsibility for their actions and sanaction the gang of 88. Nothing can get there people to move or even reply. Steel's "We had to stop the pictures " is the most classic.It actually says it all. Nothing changes - not even a "thanks for calling" dismissal.,Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-53212442788542872422007-01-29T23:44:00.000-05:002007-01-29T23:44:00.000-05:00Whoever is attempting to insult me by alluding to ...Whoever is attempting to insult me by alluding to "meds" is quite clever.<br /><br />I'm stung to the quick.<br /><br />RPAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-34316154620233909012007-01-29T23:10:00.000-05:002007-01-29T23:10:00.000-05:00DNA exonerates you unless you are a white male fro...DNA exonerates you unless you are a white male from a reasonably wealthy background and your accuser is a minority who is not well-off.<br /><br />If you are a well-off, white male you can subtract further points if you are an athlete and even more points if you play an allegedly "preppy" sport at a prestigious university. <br /><br />If you fit this description, DNA will NOT exonerate you. In fact, all your parents hard work to provide a nice life for you will be used against you and your family. The press will breathlessly report the assessed value of your family home and the tuition of your high school. Your parents will be referred to as a "high-powered" Wall Street executive or "high-powered" Washington lawyer etc. The media will then report that all your "high-powered" parents have hired "high-powered" defense attorneys to take your case. <br /><br />Basically, you will be denounced as "privileged" and therefore obviously guilty no matter what DNA results and science establish. Science has now officially been politicized. Political correctness ruins everything it touches. Can science survive?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-8456385461102359682007-01-29T22:50:00.000-05:002007-01-29T22:50:00.000-05:0010:19 PM
"MSM is entertainment. This kind of story...10:19 PM<br /><i>"MSM is entertainment. This kind of story separates the goats from the sheep."</i><br /><br />Entertainment with a lot of agenda driven editorial control. <br /><br />Everything from selecting what to publish, what to bury, what to ignore, and how to frame with slanted and misleading headlines.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-3910233201013915682007-01-29T22:44:00.000-05:002007-01-29T22:44:00.000-05:00RIP Barbaro - What a guy! A shinning example of co...RIP Barbaro - What a guy! A shinning example of courage to us all. Love you babe.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-21191471776590517962007-01-29T22:19:00.000-05:002007-01-29T22:19:00.000-05:00What makes for interesting copy?
a) Suspect clear...What makes for interesting copy?<br /><br />a) Suspect cleared by DNA, no charges filed.<br /><br />b) Innocent man released after 50 years in prison: DNA exhonerates<br /><br />MSM is entertainment. This kind of story separates the goats from the sheep.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-88652896301147693732007-01-29T21:53:00.000-05:002007-01-29T21:53:00.000-05:009:48 The Good A-L-L Professor
What you say makes ...9:48 The Good A-L-L Professor<br /><br />What you say makes sense. I attended a selective college (not Duke). <br /><br />In humanities, very few people got any grades lower than a B-. C+s and Cs were for people who for some reason, blew off the course. Ds? <br /><br /><br /> The only people who got Fs were people who failed to submit the required papers or take the required exams.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-49862776540399279202007-01-29T21:48:00.000-05:002007-01-29T21:48:00.000-05:00In humanities classes at Duke, a B- is usually the...In humanities classes at Duke, a B- is usually the lowest grade given. "Cs" are rare, "Ds" essentially extinct. The "Fs" given by Curtis had nothing to do with class performance. <br /><br />Anti-Leftist LiberalAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-35488015257195710872007-01-29T21:39:00.000-05:002007-01-29T21:39:00.000-05:006:44 PM
RP - "The NY Times isn't as liberal as you...6:44 PM<br />RP - <i>"The NY Times isn't as liberal as you might think."</i><br /><br />RP - are you off your meds again or has your NYT subscription just run out.<br /><br />Yea, the Old Gray Lady is a bastion of conservative spew.<br /><br />MGMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-24274476001627424362007-01-29T21:36:00.000-05:002007-01-29T21:36:00.000-05:00RIP. Poor horse. In other news, Washington DC, Sat...RIP. Poor horse. In other news, Washington DC, Saturday, police were ordered to move their lines back and allow 300 protesters to spray paint slogans on the steps of the Capital. Savages.<br />MTU'76Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-42213962468657192262007-01-29T21:29:00.000-05:002007-01-29T21:29:00.000-05:00Howell Raines' deputy was Gerald Boyd, who recentl...Howell Raines' deputy was Gerald Boyd, who recently passed away.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-784780432550381032007-01-29T20:59:00.000-05:002007-01-29T20:59:00.000-05:002nd RIP Barbaro!2nd RIP Barbaro!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-3969127943045197392007-01-29T20:56:00.000-05:002007-01-29T20:56:00.000-05:00RIP Barboro!RIP Barboro!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-3419368573625031112007-01-29T20:42:00.000-05:002007-01-29T20:42:00.000-05:00Anon 7:55 -
So, where'd Duff go wrong????
dlAnon 7:55 - <br /><br />So, where'd Duff go wrong????<br /><br />dlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-53296100679411727112007-01-29T19:58:00.000-05:002007-01-29T19:58:00.000-05:007:24PM,
Read this to find out why people take dru...7:24PM,<br /><br />Read this to find out why people take drugs:<br /><br /><a href="http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2004/09/heroin.html">Heroin</a><br /><br /><a href="http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2007/01/addiction-is-genetic-disease.html">Addiction Is A Genetic Disease</a>M. Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09508934110558197375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-38969025863658425602007-01-29T19:56:00.000-05:002007-01-29T19:56:00.000-05:00New info on Guilford College
A sixth player has b...New info on <a href="http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2007/01/magistration.html">Guilford College</a><br /><br />A sixth player has been charged. Not by law enforcement either.M. Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09508934110558197375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-64678448262645692442007-01-29T19:55:00.000-05:002007-01-29T19:55:00.000-05:00Duff's bio.<a href="http://www.reporter.org/desktop/rd/duffbio.htm">Duff's bio.</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-28634086702307272472007-01-29T19:24:00.001-05:002007-01-29T19:24:00.001-05:004:40 Right on. I do believe why the "war on drugs"...4:40 Right on. I do believe why the "war on drugs" continues is because most of Congress is being paid off by the drug cartels. Let the druggies blow their noses off if they want. Mandatory drug testing would help - hit them in their pocketbooks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-36537887454491408152007-01-29T19:24:00.000-05:002007-01-29T19:24:00.000-05:00Cedarford: No, again you are trying to assign odds...Cedarford: No, again you are trying to assign odds to a situation where you don't know the facts.<br /><br />And so it is with ANY use of statistical history as a probability statement. If we really knew all the fact s the probability would be 0 or 1. Statistical probabilities are a form of reasoning by imperfect analogy. Since no analogy is ever perfect, that is no crime against reason.<br /><br />Anyway, my calculation using the historical statistics from that course alone ( the only data avaialble to us at this time) are that the odds of any "random" student getting an F is 1 in 20. So, the odds of two lacrosse players disparaged outside the classroom by the same professor getting an F is 1 in 400. If you want to bring up the facts that the students were a) distracted by the allegations and b) suddenly had some extra time to study then yeah the analogy isn't perfect. Still, good enough for government work. Speculating about other factors that may be at work are irrelevant because they also apply to the other students.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-32514783544577021952007-01-29T19:19:00.000-05:002007-01-29T19:19:00.000-05:00re Wilson charging Times with racial discriminatio...re Wilson charging Times with racial discrimination<br /><br />Does anyone know for a FACT that Wison is black? Please enlighten me.<br /><br />RPAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com