Today's discussion about the news
Comments
-
Its a well written article. However, the thrust of it is statistical weaknesses in the prosecution, and there are no numbers to illustrate this; just a lot of frequentlys, and not uncommons. I also note the defence had options they didn't take up.
In a sense the article is the counterpoint to the prosecution, but not more balanced for that. You have an expert criticising another expert for disagreeing with them. Then pointing out that's the problem with experts. Do you see the issue with the article when looked at that way?
Unfortunately for her, but for good reason, new evidence is not new arguments.
0 -
Especially in Croydon Crown Court...
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Reminds me of the Sally Clark case. She was convicted of killing her two babies on the basis of the probability of two 'cot deaths' in the same family being 'too low'. Her conviction was overturned years later on second appeal, partly because the '1 in 73m' probability claim was completely unsubstantiated.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Thanks for reading it.
It doesn't necessarily have to be balanced, if the aim is to point out why the expert evidence is questionable. I've no idea why the defence didn't counter it effectively (or at all, in effect). The whole thing sounds like a bit of a mess. Statistics even at the best of times aren't necessarily grasped as easily as people think they should be (e.g. 'most people in the UK have more than the average number of legs'), and in something as complex as this, magic statistics that 'prove' something (as RJS notes) probably do nothing of the sort.
0 -
Well I largely agree, hence why I bang on so much about shitty FT tweets.
The expert witness evidence isn't questionable in the sense that cheap Chinese rim brake wheels are questionable. It is more that there is no debate that the jury gets to hear between witnesses - only between a lawyer and a witness.
In theory, the witnesses already have a duty before the court rather than to one side or the other (not sure this came out in the article that well). All that said, the notion of "hot tubbing" is quite a good one, because it would better reflect the sort of divergent opinions that a group of experts can have, while all being broadly correct.
Not going to happen though.
------
On a related slight tangent, I'm currently listening to a very detailed podcast from New Zealand following an inquest into the drowning of a 4 year boy old a few years ago. Its up to about 40 episodes now. (What can I say - hearing about death is relaxing and sends me to sleep at night.)
There is a lot of testimony from pathologists and child psychologists and forensic experts etc - all of whom are speculating because the plod decided within half an hour that it was an accidental death and didn't investigate anything properly.
It is interesting how these experts differ in terms of their levels of caution in how definitive they are willing to be based on limited information.
Also interesting that two of the three pathologists have tacitly admitted that their findings will depend to a great extent on what they are told about the circumstances of the death in advance.
There is a hint of this in the Private Eye article, where it talks about all of the null findings from pathologists - the article also says there were no suspicions raised in advance.
What it doesn't say clearly, but does infer, is that the absence of suspicion does colour how the autopsy plays out, what they look for and how hard they look for it. e.g. None of the children were tested for exogenous insulin, because there was no suggestion that it might have been needed.
1 -
Well, you listen to podcasts about death to send you to sleep, and I listen to steady rain outside the open window, and eat cucumber and tomato sandwiches. Each to his own.
0 -
-
WTF has his professed religion got to do with anything?
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
stirs up the self-righteous wrath of the christians who think their imaginary friend gives them the right to hurt others
my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
Dontcha know that we are emulating the U.S.? Christian = good, non-Christian = bad.
Except half-arsed as usual so we use knives instead of guns. Thankfully, I suppose.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
It's not, though, is it. There is no religious angle to the story.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Actually you might be surprised what is still being espoused as religious dogma. Remember the snafu about Kate Forbes, then SNP leadership candidate, and her views on gay marriage? I know three other people in the same church with analogous views, plus a whole sub cult within my extended family who are members of a church with similar teaching in England and Wales. That church is still hard six day creationist.
So from a particular person's point of view, all sorts of things can be hung on their religious sensitivity.
And they walk among us. 8-/
0 -
I hadn't heard of the story so googled the guys name. To be fair to the Telegraph, its not them pushing the religious angle - they guy is claiming his 'religious rights' are being denied.
0 -
Sure. He can believe whatever he likes. He was sacked for having a public row with his boss.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Pity he wasn't sacked for discrimination.
0 -
Which was exactly my point - the Telegraph are just trying to stoke culture wars rather than report news accurately. Hence "It's not a newspaper".
1 -
I have made this point before around the whole Tory party/right wing media/culture wars stuff, plus the obvious lurch the Tory's took towards excessively right wing policy making. Why are they doing it? Surely the purpose, as with Trump, is to win power and then implement this crap. But as the recent election showed, this stuff does not play well here, we are not the US and this fundamentalist/Christian/neocon Project 2025esqe nonsense appeals to a tiny % of Brits.
I may be missing some brilliant playbook they are working from, but I just don't see the point of it.
0 -
-
It's almost as though Macron is trolling Stevo 😁
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Ah yes, of course, Macron was thinking about snubbing Britain when he appointed Barnier. Of course he would. Those Frenchies, eh, what are they like?
0 -
-
Why's that?
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Surely he's trolling the unreconciled remaniacs of Cake Stop? 🙂
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Ah yes, The Telegraph. Of course. The arbiter of truth and sanity.
0 -
Booo, no fun 😛
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I can't quite put my finger on why a Telegraph 'news' diet might not necessarily lead to a balanced world view...
0 -
Apparently this empty car park, constructed under the Tory Government, is a metaphor for Labour's Britain. Read all about it in the Telegraph.
0 -
Nah, that story just doesn't sit well. 😉
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
It’s weird that they go on about blame. To any sane person it was obvious that the country had been broken before they came in and it’s not exactly unreasonable to mention that when people seem to expect them to wave a magic wand and fix it in a few months.
1
