Hana Eddib 09/12/17
Forensics current event 1
Sampson, Barbara A. “New York DNA Crime Lab.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 7 Sept. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/opinion/medical-examiner-new-york-city.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FForensic%2BScience&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection.
In Barbara Sampson’s “A New York DNA Crime Lab”, Sampson published a letter written by the New York City chief medical examiner. The letter discussed the crime labs integrity with their DNA findings. They claimed to be unbiased in producing evidence that supports one party over another. The letter discussed how in previous circumstances, defense lawyers and the FBI would request usage of the “Forensic Statistical Tool” (F.A.S.T) for “high sensitivity testing.” However, the lab upgraded their technology to technology that no longer required F.S.T. They reiterated their claim that they were nonpartisan to the court and would continue to stand by forensic evidence and that their upgrades were just another way of ensuring their integrity.
This article is very relevant to our society. DNA and forensic evidence is a large indicator of a comitance of a crime. It is important that if their are any ways to improve our ability to find evidence through forensics, that we must implement those improvements. As a society, we must be present and involved in making sure our communities are safe and that criminals are serving their time. Forensic evidence is a great way to ensure the right people are charged for a crime.
The article was a very interesting read. Having the actual letter included gave readers a direct perspective of the chief medical examiner. However, the author was missing some important factors. Considering the author didn’t include any background information before publishing the letter, it was a little hard to follow the subject of it. It would’ve been appreciated had the author opted to include a slight introduction in which they discussed the topic at hand and the relevance of the letter to the topic. It also would’ve been nice to know what the response was to the letter. The response could help to give insight on how people feel about this change in technology.
15 comments:
This article had many good points that were all presented very well. One of them was the summary. I thought the summary was very well written and gave a great overview of the article that was written about. I also liked how she explained the relevance of this article to modern society and our class. It was also great how they were open in saying what the article needed to add to make it better.
It would have been helpful if she explained what F.A.S.T. or F. S. T., she used both abbreviations, was instead of just saying what it was other than just “high sensitivity testing”. Other then that I thought the current event was very well written and explained what it needed to.
Because of this article I learned about how important it is to these crime labs to keep their integrity up so they can keep getting cases to keep themselves open.
Will Maze
9/12/17
Forensics comment
Mr. Ippolito
In Hana’s review of “New York DNA Crime Lab” I liked how she presented the topic of discussion because it was a very good analysis. It was not hard to get a sense of what the article was about and was very easy to follow along. I also enjoyed reading how she said how this topic is relevant because for some people that do not know much about how forensics work it is very interesting to see that connection being made here. Lastly, I liked how she still gave a very good analysis even though she said that the article itself was kind of hard to follow along at times.
One thing she could have done a little bit better is talk about what was missing in the article that made the article hard to follow at times. More examples of the weak spots in the article would help the readers understand why she did not give examples of why the article was hard to follow. Another thing that could have been interesting was if she included the important factors that the author was missing so the reader knows ahead of time that if they are looking for a specific topic in the article, her review could help people know if the their topic of interest was included in the article.
Overall, I really liked her analysis and found it very interesting that she talked about “Forensic Statistical Tool” (F.A.S.T) which is used for high sensitivity testing. Without her review of this article i wouldn’t have know what F.A.S.T is.
Will Maze
9/12/17
Forensics comment
Mr. Ippolito
In Hana’s review of “New York DNA Crime Lab” I liked how she presented the topic of discussion because it was a very good analysis. It was not hard to get a sense of what the article was about and was very easy to follow along. I also enjoyed reading how she said how this topic is relevant because for some people that do not know much about how forensics work it is very interesting to see that connection being made here. Lastly, I liked how she still gave a very good analysis even though she said that the article itself was kind of hard to follow along at times.
One thing she could have done a little bit better is talk about what was missing in the article that made the article hard to follow at times. More examples of the weak spots in the article would help the readers understand why she did not give examples of why the article was hard to follow. Another thing that could have been interesting was if she included the important factors that the author was missing so the reader knows ahead of time that if they are looking for a specific topic in the article, her review could help people know if the their topic of interest was included in the article.
Overall, I really liked her analysis and found it very interesting that she talked about “Forensic Statistical Tool” (F.A.S.T) which is used for high sensitivity testing. Without her review of this article i wouldn’t have know what F.A.S.T is.
Will Maze
9/12/17
Forensics comment
Mr. Ippolito
In Hana’s review of “New York DNA Crime Lab” I liked how she presented the topic of discussion because it was a very good analysis. It was not hard to get a sense of what the article was about and was very easy to follow along. I also enjoyed reading how she said how this topic is relevant because for some people that do not know much about how forensics work it is very interesting to see that connection being made here. Lastly, I liked how she still gave a very good analysis even though she said that the article itself was kind of hard to follow along at times.
One thing she could have done a little bit better is talk about what was missing in the article that made the article hard to follow at times. More examples of the weak spots in the article would help the readers understand why she did not give examples of why the article was hard to follow. Another thing that could have been interesting was if she included the important factors that the author was missing so the reader knows ahead of time that if they are looking for a specific topic in the article, her review could help people know if the their topic of interest was included in the article.
Overall, I really liked her analysis and found it very interesting that she talked about “Forensic Statistical Tool” (F.A.S.T) which is used for high sensitivity testing. Without her review of this article i wouldn’t have know what F.A.S.T is.
The article was well presented and she made her points well and they were easy to follow. She summarized the article welland made me understand what the full article was about. I liked they she was open about her criticism of the article which was nice because it showed its flaws. I also liked how she talked about the people being present and knowing what is going on because this is what sends people to jail and if it is flawed we should know.
I was confused on was FAST and FST were because she defined FAST but then referred to FST later on so I wasn't sure if they were the same thing or different, also if more explanation was given on what they actually were would have been helpful.
This article made me learn that we should be more involved in these sort of things because we have to hold these labs to a certain standard or else they are worthless.
Hanna did a very good job on her critique of Barbara Sampson’s article, “A New York DNA Crime Lab”. She did a very good job explaining her article in the sense of its relevance and why it matters today. She voiced her opinion very well as she thoroughly explained her beliefs towards the topic and the author. She also did a very good job of summarizing the article. I had a very good sense of the topic after reading her critique. For Hannah to make her critique better, I would add direct quotes and statistics from the article. Quotes help summarize the article and are a nice change up from all of your own words.I would also add a picture to help give a visual to the readers so they better understand the topic. From reading this article I learned that it was possible to request usage of the “Forensic Statistical Tool” (F.A.S.T) for “high sensitivity testing.”
Hanna did a very good job on her critique of Barbara Sampson’s article, “A New York DNA Crime Lab”. She did a very good job explaining her article in the sense of its relevance and why it matters today. She voiced her opinion very well as she thoroughly explained her beliefs towards the topic and the author. She also did a very good job of summarizing the article. I had a very good sense of the topic after reading her critique. For Hannah to make her critique better, I would add direct quotes and statistics from the article. Quotes help summarize the article and are a nice change up from all of your own words.I would also add a picture to help give a visual to the readers so they better understand the topic. From reading this article I learned that it was possible to request usage of the “Forensic Statistical Tool” (F.A.S.T) for “high sensitivity testing.”
Sampson, Barbara A. “New York DNA Crime Lab.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 7 Sept. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/opinion/medical-examiner-new-york-city.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FForensic%2BScience&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/opinion/medical-examiner-new-york-city.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FForensic%20Science&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection
The review you made for this article and letter made a lot of sense and I can relate to much of what you are saying. The last paragraph sums up how you personally feel about using forensic research to determine a comitance of a crime through studies like DNA which I agree with fully as well. Emphasising how important this is in our own communities is a must as this can affect everyone and keep us all safer as you explain “This article is very relevant to our society. DNA and forensic evidence is a large indicator of a comitance of a crime.”
I would have gone into how crucial DNA is for proving people not guilty as well as guilty. Having a wrong conviction before DNA times was not only terrible for that person wrongly convicted, but the person who got away could easily be a dangerous person. I also would have talked about the two DNA analysis methods more as they played a crucial role in this article and the upgrades they have had.
I had no idea about DNA analysis methods and now I have learned about F.A.S.T. which is completely revolutionary when dealing with proving innocence using Dna, and convicting people of crimes they did commit.
The review you made for this article and letter made a lot of sense and I can relate to much of what you are saying. The last paragraph sums up how you personally feel about using forensic research to determine a comitance of a crime through studies like DNA which I agree with fully as well. Emphasising how important this is in our own communities is a must as this can affect everyone and keep us all safer as you explain “This article is very relevant to our society. DNA and forensic evidence is a large indicator of a comitance of a crime.”
I would have gone into how crucial DNA is for proving people not guilty as well as guilty. Having a wrong conviction before DNA times was not only terrible for that person wrongly convicted, but the person who got away could easily be a dangerous person. I also would have talked about the two DNA analysis methods more as they played a crucial role in this article and the upgrades they have had.
I had no idea about DNA analysis methods and now I have learned about F.A.S.T. which is completely revolutionary when dealing with proving innocence using Dna, and convicting people of crimes they did commit.
I personally really like this article because it summarizes how the Crime DNA work in New York and the significance of it. I like the point that how forensics actually is relevant to our class and ourselves in life.
I thought the current event is well written because she really explain deeply about this topic. Some things need more clarification also but otherwise, it is well written.
Because of this article I know that how the New York Crome lab work and what should we keep in mind of.
Maggie Miller
Forensics A/B Odd
9/18/17
Current Event Comment 2
Sampson, Barbara A. “New York DNA Crime Lab.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 7 Sept. 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/opinion/medical-examiner-new-york-city.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FForensic%20Science&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection
Hana Eddib submitted a review on the news article “New York DNA Crime Lab” written by Barbara Sampson, from The New York Times. Hana does an excellent job beginning her piece by sharing the main information the article discusses, which is the trust in DNA Crime Lab’s unbiased work. The does this by stating the previous methods used by FBI agents to identify fingerprints from a crime scene using “Forensic Statistical Tool,” to why they now use updated technology which does not require the use of the F.S.T Test. Hana was very clear as to what the article’s claim was, that the forensic labs are not biased in courts with crime scene evidence. Hana provides a wonderful example to show how this article connects to our class and everyday lives, by stating how forensic lab investigations are a very important part of our justice system. However, while Hana did provide adequate information on the article’s claim etc. she did lack details in her review, which were valuable to inform the reader of the issues. As well as, she included little sentences to benefit the organization and writing of her piece, it felt more like a list of information and opinion than a written piece. Nonetheless, I was unaware of the previous and present methods used by government officials, I learned a lot I didn’t know about the public’s question in the forensic lab’s unbiased work.
Hana, as I read your review of the article, New York DNA Crime Lab, I thought you did nice job. I thought your summary was well written and talked about all the main points the article pointed out. It was clear and easy to follow which as a reader was helpful to understand your opinion better. I liked how you weren’t afraid to say your criticism of the article because I agree with the accusations you make, “However, the author was missing some important factors. Considering the author didn’t include any background information before publishing the letter, it was a little hard to follow the subject of it.” The lack of information from the author was a failing and I thought you did a good job on pointing it out.
To strengthen your article I think you could have search up information the article was missing. This could have help made your point stronger. It would've been more helpful for the reader if Hana had explained and went into more depth on what F.A.S.T and F.S.T is. Overall I thought she did a good job.
This article is important because it is trying to help improve our capability of finding evidence through forensics. This will help clear the free and convict the guilty.
In this report Hanna Eddib was able to accurately summarize the article, “New York DNA Crime Lab.” This article was mostly about the discussion of crime labs integrity with their DNA findings. Hanna Eddib did a good job touching upon the important point of this article, describing how they claimed to be unbiased while producing evidence that might support one party over another. In addition to this, Hanna was able to talk about the relevance of this article, saying that the DNA and forensics is a large indicator of a comitance crime. It's important to find evidence through forensics, that we must implement those improvement. A last thing Hanna did well, was accurately criticize what the author could have done to make the article better. I agree with Hanna and saying that the article was missing an important facts and was hard to follow at times. Although Hanna did a good job addressing the main points, I think she could have made it better if she pulled a few quotes from the article to give the review more detail and evidence. I think it would have been a good idea when summarizing the article to pull a quote on the author's opinion on this topic. Another thing Hanna could have done was improve her grammar. ALthough most of it was well written there were a few parts she could have improved which would have made the review better. One thing I was impressed with from reading this article and review was how They claimed to be unbiased in producing evidence that supports one party over another and the letter discussed how in previous circumstances, defense lawyers and the FBI would request usage of the Forensic Statistical Tool for high sensitivity testing. However, the lab upgraded their technology to technology that no longer required F.S.T. and they were nonpartisan to the court and continue to stand by forensic evidence was just another way of ensuring their integrity. Overall Hanna did a great job summarizing this article and touched upon the important notes.
Griffin Garbarini
Forensics
Mr. Ippolito
09/19/17
Current Event 3
MLA Citation:
Sampson, Barbara A. “New York DNA Crime Lab.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 7 Sept. 2017
Comment:
Hana Eddib submitted her inaugural forensics review on the New York Times article titled “New York DNA Crime Lab” written by Barbara Sampson. There were several aspects of this article review that were well done. Hana’s strongest aspect in her writing is her connection between the article and our forensics class through intriguing examples. She wrote that without the crime labs that hold all of our forensic scientists and investigators, the entire justice system would be flawed. This was a point I had never really thought of. Hana’s second strong aspect was that she had a strong opinion in the review which made it more personal. She wrote that “As a society, we must be present and involved in making sure our communities are safe and that criminals are serving their time. Forensic evidence is a great way to ensure the right people are charged for a crime”. Our society must keep improving these techniques to “ensure” people are not put away for crimes they did not commit and the real propagators are punished. The third aspect she did well was that she shared the necessary base information. She reviews the DNA Crime Lab’s work and specifically reviews the FBI’s previous methods of fingerprinting a crime scene. The agents would use “Forensic Statistical Tools”, which is abbreviated as the F.S.T. test, but now they use updated technology.
While Hana did a great job reviewing the article, there is room for improvement. While I got a brief overview of the article, I did not really learn what the article was about. The review was too brief. I think she could have spent some more time reviewing the article. Her second area of improvement is regarding her use of vocabulary. Her did not incorporate any real forensic vocabulary that we have used and learned in our class. To improve this, she should look at her notes from class to help her write more. Hana also did not understand that Barbara Sampson is the Chief Medical Examiner in NYC and was the one publishing her own letter.
Hana’s review and the article itself were very interesting and educational. I learned about the New York City Chief Medical Examiner, Barbara Sampson, and a letter she published regarding F.S.T. and new technologies. Most importantly, I freshened my mind on the importance of forensic investigators in the judicial process. They are one of the most important factors of the process and this article helped me to remember that. Hats off.
Post a Comment