ha, the children are locked up too, by the truck load.

The issue isn’t about the cost of the process. It’s about punishing the innocent and letting the guilty go free (by convicting the wrong guy). At every stage in the process, the cards are heavily stacked in favor of the state and that’s because the state sets the rules. The idea that they need to exclude examination of forensic experts to streamline the process isn’t credible. The fact that they manage to successfully prosecute and lock up such a large proportion of the population shows pretty clearly that the process is anything but over-burdened.

Also, I might add that the way to unburden the state is not to streamline the process, but to drastically reduce the number of prosecutable offenses. The fact that the public sees no contradiction in calling this the “land of the free” while locking up so many of its citizens shows the dimensions of the abyss that separates patriotic sentiment and reality.

There’s something about this I don’t get. Lab people are not accusers. The tech who discovers that the DNA found at the crime scene matches the DNA of the defendant is not accusing him of anything, simply stating findings. It’s not like a witness who testifies that he saw the defendant do it.

They’re witnesses for the prosecution. as such, that places them under the 6th amendment just as any witness would be. The exact wording in the constitution is “to be confronted with the witnesses against him”

Just like an eyewitness that ‘saw the crime’, and is subject to cross examination, so too are those that bring witness by analysis. Any aspect of their procedures or science may be questioned or shown lax through cross examination. If their procedures are strong, and their science long… then their testimony will hold. But if the defense can show lapses, or that the science is crap… that will come out in cross examination.

Michigan has an elegant solution for those toxicologists: interactive video testimony. Several courts are wired for live video conferencing, so the toxicologists testify from a room in the lab. So far, there have not been complaints about whether this “counts” as confronting them.

(For those of you in smaller states: you can drive 8 hours from Lansing and still be in Michigan. That’s a long time to testify in a case or two.)

Sotomayor is as good as being confirmed by the senate. She would have to do something monumentally stupid at this point not to be appointed.

The percentage of cases going to trial could well go up if defense lawyers think that bringing lab analysts to court will help their cases. Lawyers also could go to trial with the hope of a dismissal if the analyst cannot be there.

*ahem*

147 cases by closed Detroit crime lab need tests

DETROIT (AP) — Authorities have identified 147 cases that will require retesting of evidence handled by a city police lab shuttered over test errors.
Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy told the Detroit Free Press in a story published Sunday that those cases had led to convictions and that the number represents the “tip of the iceberg.” She said defense lawyers notified her office of 30 other cases that they believe relied on mishandled evidence.

Burden of proof and all that stuff.

In the cases I handle I know that drug screen results can’t come in to evidence just because they look like official reports and have my client’s name on them and are on letterhead. I have to have a witness testify that they work at the lab where the results are produced and yada yada yada…. Are states carving out exceptions so that a prosecutor merely has to put forward a sheet of paper that says .08 and poof it’s in evidence?

Oh well. While we’re on the topic of utltiy arguments, what’s with having all these police always testifying!? Don’t they know that makes our streets less safe!!?? God! Why can’t police reports just come into evidence so that we can save time and money…. and THE CHILDREN!!!

I also agree that getting rid of this stupid “war on drugs” would unburden our system significantly. If we can’t tell a woman what to do with her reproductive system how can we tell a drug addict what to do with his brain or veins?