Re:Are courts keeping “junk science” out of the courtroom?
by notahacker on Monday February 17, 2020 @02:07PM
(#22349770)
The point is that if a law enforcement person lies about finding something due to their dog, the problem is juries [reasonably] trust the law enforcement personnel are telling the truth about what they find afterwards, not that they trust the dog's instincts. Indeed your average jury is almost guaranteed to have someone with enough interest in dogs to know they sometimes react to things other than suspicious substances.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Are courts keeping “junk science” out of the courtroom?
by jariel on Monday February 17, 2020 @09:17PM
(#22352869)
The cop has 1000 ways to compromise justice using any and all tools, so this is a secondary issue.
If dogs can indeed sniff out stuff in a manner consistently beyond random, then they are a good first pass tool.