而且DNA数据往往比普遍了解的要模棱两可。
Dr Dror thinks that in about 25% of cases, tiny samples or the mixing of material from morethan one person can lead to such ambiguity.
Dror博士认为在大约25%的案子里,小样本或者从不止一人身上取来的混合物质可能导致这样的二义性。
Moreover, such is DNA s reputation that, when faced with claims that the molecule puts adefendant in a place where a crime has been committed,
此外,DNA的好名声就是这样,当面临宣称用DNA分子证明被告所犯的罪的时候,
that defendant will often agree to a plea-bargain he might otherwise not have accepted.
被告通常会同意认罪辩诉,否则他也许不会接受。
This one example does not prove the existence of a systematic problem.
这个例子没有证明系统性问题的存在。
But it does point to a sloppy approach to science.
但是它确实指出了一个科学上草率的方法。
According to Norah Rudin, a forensic-DNA consultant in Mountain View, California, forensicscientists are beginning to accept that cognitive bias exists,
根据一位加利福尼亚州芒廷维尤的法庭DNA顾问Norah Rudin,法庭科学家正在开始接受那种认知性偏差的存在,
【2015考研英语阅读司法科学】相关文章:
最新
2016-10-18
2016-10-11
2016-10-11
2016-10-08
2016-09-30
2016-09-30