In this case the police acted entirely properly. Unfortunately it is impossible to prove a negative, so Mr Scott couldn't prove he hadn't been to Manchester and, in the face of DNA evidence suggesting he did do it, it was reasonable to suppose he was lying. Mr Scott now needs to sue the lab.
Braintree here, commenting from a public computer.
I would love to know how the error was discovered. Was it because the accused's solicitor started asking inconvenient questions or did the lab people independently figure out their own mistake and honestly come forward? If the latter, they deserve nothing but posies. Eveybody screws up. Not everyone is honest about it.
Every civilized society must strive to (1) eradicate heinous crimes by punishing the offenders, and (2) insure that the innocent aren't punished along with the offenders. Too often, the second half of that balance is omitted from the public discourse. Accusations of serious criminality, especially murder and sexual wrongdoing, too often are their own convictions in the high court of public opinion because the stigma is so severe. It is our mission to raise awareness about the injustices suffered by persons wrongly accused of serious criminality. Protecting the innocent from unjust harm as a result of a wrongful accusation is a hallmark of a civilized society.
2 comments:
In this case the police acted entirely properly. Unfortunately it is impossible to prove a negative, so Mr Scott couldn't prove he hadn't been to Manchester and, in the face of DNA evidence suggesting he did do it, it was reasonable to suppose he was lying. Mr Scott now needs to sue the lab.
Braintree here, commenting from a public computer.
I would love to know how the error was discovered. Was it because the accused's solicitor started asking inconvenient questions or did the lab people independently figure out their own mistake and honestly come forward? If the latter, they deserve nothing but posies. Eveybody screws up. Not everyone is honest about it.
Post a Comment