Blogowogo: The Blog Networkbeta
  Not a member yet? Join today. Already a member? Sign-In.  
Blogowogo: The Blog Network "The People-Powered Blog Directory"
Home Today's Catch Reader Comments Top-Rated Blogs Add a Blog Info for Bloggers About Us
  Latest post rated: Creating the Hottest Female Athlete Ever. Rating: 4 stars.   Latest blog added: Coconut Palm Tree. Welcome!


Home > Politics > TalkLeft > Dog Scent Lineup Gets Wrong Guy, Junk Science?
 
Flag for Objectionable Content?
Politics  

TalkLeft:  
Average Rating:
Your Rating:  
Dog Scent Lineup Gets Wrong Guy, Junk Science?
2009-10-05 10:30am -07:00T   |   Total Score: 138 points   |   Average Rating: 3.94 out of 5   |   Post History   |   Visit TalkLeft  |   1 Comment This Entry Contains 1 Comment

 

Outtake:

In Texas, police used a dog scent lineup to get the perp in a murder case. The dogs got it wrong.

According to the dogs, the perp was one of the cops. He was under suspicion for five months. Then, DNA revealed the real murderer who pleaded guilty.

The Innocence Project of Texas calls the practice "junk science that's being used by prosecutors and judges to convict people." The nonprofit group... wants state governments to ban the use of dog-scent lineups. It says an unknown number of people have been wrongly accused or convicted from the dog-scent lineups.

[More...] How the lineup works:

Dog-scent lineups are similar to visual lineups; but instead of a witness picking a suspect from a group of people, bloodhounds walk along a line of tin cans containing individual scents from possible suspects.

Investigators get the scents from rubbing a gauze pad on someone's body or clothes, and that gauze pad is then placed in a tin can. The dog handler gives the bloodhound the scent they're looking for, and then the handler and animal walk...

Read More on TalkLeft...

 

Reader Comments
Have an opinion about what you've read? This is a great opportunity to post a comment directly on TalkLeft, or you can post your comment here:
 

By Anonymous (Male)

was a Jury Foreman in a burglary case involving 3 teens in 2007and the key evidence was the scent lineup from the very same dogs of Deputy Pikett. These teens also had the misfortune of having a state provided attorney in Houston, Texas. The lawyer assigned asked no questions about the scent lineup, such as ensuring that the evidence had not been tainted. There were many questions that I wanted answers too but of course we could not ask them, and the horrible defense attorney asked random questions as if he had never tried a case. On top of that, the judge was a hangman's judge and any time a witness tried to provide information that was not specifically asked he cut off the witness and threatened them with "contempt of court."

My primary concern was that the very same police officials that arrested and touched the teens also collected the scent evidence. On the one hand, Mr. Pickens during his testimony was making grand statements about how infallible his dogs were, what an expert witness he was and how everyone came to him for his dogs expertise, and how sensitive the dogs noses were but his scent lineup and processing of evidence seemed shoddy. The prosecutor showed us a video of the dogs at work, we watched either a training exercise or an actual scent lineup and the people assisting were either his wife or a friend to set up the lineup (I can't remember which, but it bothered me). Instead of making me feel comfortable about how scientific it was it did the exact opposite.
I used to work in HR and feel like I am okay at reading people, but Mr. Pickens testimony also bothered me on a different level, he seemed to enjoy the notoriety, his status appeared to be wrapped up in his dogs and his conviction that they were infallible really scared me because he appeared to have lost his objectivity.

I was actually one of two jurists that held out for a while about convicting the teen, but eventually we consented to a guilty verdict. I even made special requests of the judge during deliberation about what information we could consider, but based on his directions and the very small box of what we could consider both us went along with a guilty verdict. In hind sight I really wish I had held out longer.

I felt like the trial was a kangaroo trial and this teen was not going to get a fair shake. It validated my thoughts that If I ever found myself cross with the law, I would sell everything to get a decent attorney. It also further convinced me that poor people that have state provided attorneys in Texas should not be executed because they can be so shoddy. This really opened my eyes to the court system and that it was not as fair as I had hoped.

Posted: Monday, October 5th, 2009 @ 7:29pm PDT

Add Your Comment:
Title (Optional):
Comment:

Bold Italic Wrap [quote] tags around selected text
   
   
 
Choose an identity: Anonymous (Male) Anonymous (Female) Other
Want to post comments with your own screen name, avatar, profile, etc.? Sign-in.
© Copyright 2009 TalkLeft. All rights reserved. If you've enjoyed this content, please visit TalkLeft to show your appreciation.
Latest Blog Entries from TalkLeft:
Political Controversy Over Colorado U.S. Attorney Selection
Fix Needed for State Opt-Out Provision of Public Option
Friday Morning Open Thread
Former Bush DOJ Officials Back Holder on Trial of 9/11 Suspects
Specter On Aghanistan
  More from TalkLeft...
Latest Blog Entries on Politics from around the Blogosphere:
The Moderate Voice: Could We Win if We Had to Fight World War II Today? (Guest Voice)
Good As You: 'No Law Against Woman Marrying Another Woman', says 103 years ago
cjrdaily: Greg Craig and Transparency
cjrdaily: Comments of the Week
cjrdaily: Bloomberg Finds the Fed on Bubble Watch
  More on Politics...

  Copyright 2009 Blogowogo.com. All rights reserved to the original publishers of their respective articles. (v. 0.016 )