Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight
I understand what control samples are. They are a filter to compare a fake test with the real test by making sure the results of the fake test are accurate.
To make sure the
fake results are accurate?
WTF?
Quote:
However, like with most fields of study there are exceptions to rules. She explained (a scientist with a respectable job in her profession) why she asked for a deviation.
It's pretty obvious why she asked for a 'deviation' from accepted professional standards - the test did not conform to normal scientific protocols.
These protocols are not something you can simply ignore just because you can't get the results you want by adhering to them - they are a necessary part of the scientific method. Ignore them and you are deviating from science.
Quote:
-She only had one test to run {so she should have done it correctly instead of screwing it up - ya think?}
-Only the control sample was impacted {unsubstantiated claim}
-The actual test didn't contain the same positive result as the control, meaning what effected the control didn't effect the actual test. {unsubstantiated claim}
-She knows what effected the control. It was her talking. {unsubstantiated claim}
-There was nothing tested of TH that day making it impossible for the source of her dna to be anything but the bullet.{DNA lasts more than one day - just FYI}
Lots of excuses that no sane person would entertain for a second.
Quote:
You can read all the books you want, it won't help you review things objectively.
I have no problem assessing this case objectively.
You are apparently heavily emotionally invested in defending the police and prosecution in this case no matter how blatant their deviation from sound principles they are.