What the scientists said did surprise me. I haven’t taken a forensics course. I assumed their “statistics” would have been more science based than fabricated. I thought it was interesting that 95% of hair samples favored the prosecution. That seems abnormally high.
If I was being prosecuted I wouldn’t have faith in the evidence being presented fairly because as a single female student there is no way I would be able to afford an independent analysis of the evidence. I would most likely have to rely on the states findings. If I were ever tried for a crime I would want my legal team to be able to access the methods used by the prosecution and be able to argue their findings correctly and competently.
After listening to the podcast it seems that professionals in the forensics field want to have more accurate testing. However, it looks as though when law enforcement has decided to prosecute an individual they are perhaps more concerned with the conviction than science. Bias has a profound effect on law enforcement’s findings.