homeschool debate | Forums Wiki

HomeSchoolDebate

Speech and Debate Resources and Community
Forums      Wiki
It is currently Fri Nov 24, 2017 4:02 pm
Not a member? Guests can only see part of the forums. To see the whole thing (and add your voice!), just register a free account by following these steps.

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue May 03, 2016 9:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:54 pm
Posts: 2
Home Schooled: Yes
There's this team in Region 7 that's running Abolish Bite-mark Evidence. Does anybody have any ideas on what that's about?

_________________
2014-2015 (R8) Gibson/Gibson
2015-2016 (R8) Gibson/Gibson


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 03, 2016 9:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 5:14 pm
Posts: 51
Home Schooled: Yes
:lol: A team ran that at Region X Regionals. Basically, it follows this format: (I didn't get a flow, so this is from memory)

- Human bite mark evidence is scientifically unreliable.
- Human bite mark evidence is admissible in Federal Courts.
- This results in wrongful convictions.
Plan:
- Amend Federal Rules of Evidence to prohibit Bite Mark Evidence.

They also went through the stock issues. They said it's topical because of something called "Principle Reform." Basically, since they're reforming a principle that governs the Federal Court System, they're reforming the Federal Court System.

From what I remember from the rest of the round, they talked about how they're distinguishing human from animal bite mark evidence, and only abolishing use of human bite mark evidence, because it's so faulty.

Anyone else, please correct me if I'm wrong on anything.

_________________
- Joshua Beckman
Region X

Beckman/Hopkins 2015-2016
LD 2016-2017
Ellerslie Discipleship Training Summer 2017
http://www.ellerslie.com


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 03, 2016 9:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 11:12 pm
Posts: 74
Home Schooled: Yes
sons_of_thunder wrote:
A team ran that at Region X Regionals.

Shhh! Don't give our region's secrets away to other regions! ;) :lol:

_________________
Lincoln Douglas 2012-2013
Anastasi/Clarahan 2013-2014
Anastasi/Anastasi 2014-2015
Anastasi/Anastasi 2015-2016
Anastasi/Anastasi 2016-2017
~~~
Arete TP Club :becool:


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 03, 2016 10:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 7:13 pm
Posts: 471
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Purcellville, VA
Are there any federal examples of wrongful convictions from bitemark evidence that teams provide?

_________________
RIX Alum | Patrick Henry College | Class of 2019


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 1:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 9:09 pm
Posts: 160
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region 7
Heheheh, this was a squirrel that was pulled out at R7 regionals. Abel/Tant collaborated with Laborde/Ostertag on it. Mike and Joe didn't qualify, and I don't know if Silas and Chris will run it at nats. But apparently there have been 24 wrongful convictions on the federal level due to bite mark evidence. Also, they used a ton of puns, like "take a bite out of..." and more that I can't remember. They talk about Ted Bundy as well. That's all I know.

_________________
~ Savannah Rigby

Beaver/Rigby | 2015-2016

Check out this video!

And this one!


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 1:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 7:13 pm
Posts: 471
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Purcellville, VA
SavyAvy wrote:
But apparently there have been 24 wrongful convictions on the federal level due to bite mark evidence
Where does this evidence come from?

_________________
RIX Alum | Patrick Henry College | Class of 2019


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 1:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 9:09 pm
Posts: 160
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region 7
marinadelayne wrote:
SavyAvy wrote:
But apparently there have been 24 wrongful convictions on the federal level due to bite mark evidence
Where does this evidence come from?


No clue. I didn't actually debate it, Mike was just telling me about it.

_________________
~ Savannah Rigby

Beaver/Rigby | 2015-2016

Check out this video!

And this one!


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 1:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 11:12 pm
Posts: 74
Home Schooled: Yes
SavyAvy wrote:
I don't know if Silas and Chris will run it at nats.

Don't you wish you knew!!! ;)

_________________
Lincoln Douglas 2012-2013
Anastasi/Clarahan 2013-2014
Anastasi/Anastasi 2014-2015
Anastasi/Anastasi 2015-2016
Anastasi/Anastasi 2016-2017
~~~
Arete TP Club :becool:


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 1:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 9:09 pm
Posts: 160
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region 7
Seabass00 wrote:
SavyAvy wrote:
I don't know if Silas and Chris will run it at nats.

Don't you wish you knew!!! ;)


Ha, not particularly. The evidence is pretty firmly on the affirmative's side, as far as it being unreliable. But it's so crazy insignificant.

_________________
~ Savannah Rigby

Beaver/Rigby | 2015-2016

Check out this video!

And this one!


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 2:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 11:12 pm
Posts: 74
Home Schooled: Yes
SavyAvy wrote:
Seabass00 wrote:
SavyAvy wrote:
I don't know if Silas and Chris will run it at nats.

Don't you wish you knew!!! ;)


Ha, not particularly. The evidence is pretty firmly on the affirmative's side, as far as it being unreliable. But it's so crazy insignificant.

I'll make sure to let him know your thoughts! ;) :P

_________________
Lincoln Douglas 2012-2013
Anastasi/Clarahan 2013-2014
Anastasi/Anastasi 2014-2015
Anastasi/Anastasi 2015-2016
Anastasi/Anastasi 2016-2017
~~~
Arete TP Club :becool:


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 3:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 5:14 pm
Posts: 51
Home Schooled: Yes
SavyAvy wrote:
Abel/Tant collaborated with Laborde/Ostertag on it.


Wait… this was a cross-regional effort? Wow… :lol:

Seabass00 wrote:
sons_of_thunder wrote:
A team ran that at Region X Regionals.

Shhh! Don't give our region's secrets away to other regions! ;) :lol:

Sorry… :oops: ;) :D

_________________
- Joshua Beckman
Region X

Beckman/Hopkins 2015-2016
LD 2016-2017
Ellerslie Discipleship Training Summer 2017
http://www.ellerslie.com


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 3:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 11:12 pm
Posts: 74
Home Schooled: Yes
sons_of_thunder wrote:
Sorry… :oops: ;) :D

No worries man! I was just kidding. ;) LaBorde/Ostertag will do fine no matter what! :D

_________________
Lincoln Douglas 2012-2013
Anastasi/Clarahan 2013-2014
Anastasi/Anastasi 2014-2015
Anastasi/Anastasi 2015-2016
Anastasi/Anastasi 2016-2017
~~~
Arete TP Club :becool:


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 1:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 5:14 pm
Posts: 51
Home Schooled: Yes
You're right about that! :)

_________________
- Joshua Beckman
Region X

Beckman/Hopkins 2015-2016
LD 2016-2017
Ellerslie Discipleship Training Summer 2017
http://www.ellerslie.com


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 4:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:07 am
Posts: 1393
Home Schooled: Yes
I'm not sure how, but Min/Murch beat this case in finals. So it's not perfect. :P But then, they are Min/Murch.

I'd guess that the best way to beat it would be to press for some evidence that bite mark evidence is wrong the majority of the time. After all, almost any type of evidence will have been used in some wrongful convictions somewhere. And Aff may have studies saying that bite mark evidence is unreliable more often than not, but that doesn't mean that the bite mark evidence that's actually ADMITTED IN COURT is unreliable to that extent.

Another thing: One of the main reasons bite mark evidence is considered "scientifically unreliable" is because there's "no proof that bite marks are unique." But the thing is, the teeth don't have to be unique to a single person. If they match a suspect, and don't match 5 other suspects, that's evidence that the one suspect did it. Sure, maybe there are 100 other people in the country that have the same bite marks...but they aren't suspects, so who cares? :P

_________________
Check out my new website!

"Never quote yourself on internet forums" - Gabriel Blacklock, 2014


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2016 2:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:15 am
Posts: 161
Home Schooled: Yes
Quote:
Another thing: One of the main reasons bite mark evidence is considered "scientifically unreliable" is because there's "no proof that bite marks are unique." But the thing is, the teeth don't have to be unique to a single person. If they match a suspect, and don't match 5 other suspects, that's evidence that the one suspect did it. Sure, maybe there are 100 other people in the country that have the same bite marks...but they aren't suspects, so who cares? :P

This is actually one of the big controversies. One side says that if we have a pool of 5 suspects, and some forensic science points to only one of them, that we can convict off of that.
The other side says that forensic science can be used to narrow down the suspect list for law enforcement, but afterwards they still need sufficient evidence of other sorts in order to convict. I would be in the second group. The status quo has often been in the first.

Though there's limited data to draw from, the best studies I've seen (meaning the most unbiased methodology) estimate the capital crime for rape/murder conviction rate is wrong in the ballpark of about 3% of the time. That's based on the rate of wrongful convictions in a tiny minority of cases, cases that 1) were made before we had DNA evidence, and 2) where there was a clear verdict that DNA evidence was able to deliver on the case after the conviction. I say ballpark of 3% because that sample size is so small. Although fortunately we may have stopped as many wrongful convictions in this small subset of cases, absent systematic changes you can only guess that we have a ballpark estimate of 3% for wrongful convictions in other cases today. Actually the general rate may be even higher since that data comes from capital rape/murder cases - where the burden of proof and presumption of innocence is higher than anywhere else.
(Some conservative sources will put the wrongful conviction rate at tiny fractions of a percent - that research is based on the exoneration rate. Apparently some people think it wise to assume that we always catch and exonerate 100% of wrongful convictions).

If I recall aright, faulty forensic science (bite mark evidence, hair follicle analysis, arson investigators, mistaken DNA analysis, etc.) plays a role in something like maybe 10-30 percent of false convictions? Something like that. Meaning we can get a fuzzy number that perhaps 1 out of two or three hundred convictions were false and could have been avoided if forensic science couldn't convict.

I think one of the best responses to this case would be significance - bite mark evidence is a very small subset of forensic science. I would advise anyone running it to broaden their case to forensic science in general. And to clarify that they are barring it as sufficient evidence for a conviction, not as a useful tool to help law enforcement know which suspects to investigate.

If anyone wanted to go further in depth on research, here are three articles I snagged from my files that could help get you started. From there following citations and google scholar searches using some similar technology will bring you to a boatload of information on false convictions and forensic evidence.
Also look up DoJ investigations into Houston area forensic labs. Also I don't remember the name but there was one lab person sometime somewhere whose analysis was faulty, often committed perjury, and was involved in I think? well over 20 innocent convictions. Forensic science is so unquestioned by courts that he didn't get caught for years, and then he was only fired.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1083735
http://www.virginialawreview.org/sites/virginialawreview.org/files/1-2.pdf
http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7269&context=jclc

_________________
Caleb Smith
Region IV Alumnus
Cog Debate

"But I declare that Carthage must be destroyed."
Cato the Elder


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2016 11:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 3:14 am
Posts: 6
Home Schooled: Yes
SavyAvy wrote:
But apparently there have been 24 wrongful convictions on the federal level due to bite mark evidence.

24 out of how many?


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited