tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5945843206427351559.post8051254117136498529..comments2024-01-25T14:51:13.377-05:00Comments on Gamso - For the Defense: IT'S A MATCH IF I SAY IT ISJeff Gamsohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09869425697771419546noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5945843206427351559.post-59597441502367135792009-07-21T21:58:07.874-04:002009-07-21T21:58:07.874-04:00Yep. It helps us, maybe, when there is no scienti...Yep. It helps us, maybe, when there is no scientific of faux-scientific evidence. But when there is, CSI has convinced folks that it's infallible. (Hence, by the way, some of the value in Scalia's opinion in Melendez-Diaz.)Jeff Gamsohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09869425697771419546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5945843206427351559.post-74513928185098836222009-07-21T21:44:20.329-04:002009-07-21T21:44:20.329-04:00I have long believed that the true "CSI effec...I have long believed that the true "CSI effect" was harmful to criminal defendants. The true effect, in my view, is that the general public believes expert evidence is infallible, no matter how scientifically unsound the expert's methods actually are. I certainly don't think most CSI-watching jurors are receptive to hearing how iffy fingerprint evidence actually is. After all, Grissom wouldn't lie to a jury.Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12429147325673256508noreply@blogger.com