Charlotte Dotson

Mr. Ippolito

Current Event 9

November 15, 2019

Works Cited

Cowley, Stacy, and Jessica Silver-greenberg. “These Machines Can Put You in Jail. Don't Trust Them.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 3 Nov. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/11/03/business/drunk-driving-breathalyzer.html.

The article, “These Machines Can Put You in Jail. Don’t Trust Them” describes a recent New York Times investigation that discovered breathalyzers are surprisingly unreliable. These machines are described as being able to estimate blood alcohol percentage to the third decimal point, but new data has emerged that demonstrates the results are often inaccurate. In the past year, “Judges in Massachusetts and New Jersey have thrown out more than 30,000 breath tests” due to their potential inaccuracy. 

The explanation for these inaccurate results often relates to the police station in which they are kept. If breathalyzers are not maintained and cleaned properly, they can produce results up to 40% too high. After interviewing lawyers, judges, policemen/women, and others who work in the field of law enforcement/law the New York Times has concluded that the results of breathalyzer tests should not be admissible in court. 

There were very few things I would change about this article. First, at times the information was presented in an unclear manner; the author switched from topic to topic at times with no clear connection. Secondly, at times the article described the testaments of experts without appropriately explaining the significance of the idea. For example, the article quoted John Fusco as saying, “ “The tests were never meant to be used that way”, but never explained why. 

I found this article extremely interesting and eye-opening. It is outrageous that people are being fined and imprisoned based on the results of an often inaccurate test. I hope that this issue is further investigated and the information further distributed. Imprisonment based on the results of a breathalyzer test should, in my opinion, be suspended until their accuracy can be determined. 

No One Would Listen': Cleared of Murder, After 33 Years in Prison

Clara DeMagalhaes                                                                                                Current Event #8

Dollinger, Arielle. “'No One Would Listen': Cleared of Murder, After 33 Years in Prison.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 22 May 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/nyregion/murder-conviction-vacated-keith-bush.html.

At 17 years old, Keith Bush was suspected of strangling a 14 year old girl and was promptly incarcerated after having to sign a confession. Despite this, he always fought to clear his name, and wrote to a lawyer called Adele Bernhard, asking her to help his case. She took it, and her subsequent investigation turned up evidence inconsistent with the confession statement and other conclusions, such as how the cause of death detailed in the confession didn’t match the girl’s actual cause of death. Additionally, DNA found under the victim’s fingernails didn’t match Bush’s DNA, and a witness who said she saw him leave with the victim the night of the crime recanted her testimony 5 years later. Most importantly, Bernhard obtained records of the case saying that the police had another suspect for the murder - John W. Jones Jr., who made a statement to the police. These statements were never told to Bush’s defense lawyer, which is a violation of evidence rules. Bernhard took the records to the district attorney, who concluded that the prosecutors had engaged in a deliberate cover up. “‘At the end of the day, we came to some very simple conclusions,’ Mr. Sini said. ‘We don’t believe Mr. Bush committed this murder. We believe Mr. Bush was denied a fair trial. And we believe that John Jones is a more probable suspect in this crime.’” 44 years after his arrest, John Bush’s conviction was thrown out and he was absolved of the crime.

A case in which an innocent person is wrongly convicted and imprisoned or worse is an unfortunate event that isn’t uncommon. This event can hopefully encourage more careful procedures and standards in the criminal justice system to ensure that an occurrence of deliberate misconduct doesn’t happen again. Furthermore, the methods used to uncover the true conclusion to this case are a signal of the advances of forensic science, which will likely be more accurate and reliable in the future.

Overall, the article was well-articulated and was a decent length. It does a great job at stirring emotion in the reader, making one feel great sympathy for the formerly suspected criminal. Yet it doesn’t overdo it to the point where it feels artificial. The use of pictures and quotes from various people involved in the case was also helpful because hearing their personal thoughts helps lend credibility to the author’s retelling of the story. However, one thing that I think could have been included was a description of what Bush is now doing after he was absolved, such as the job that he might have or if he might be engaged. It would be a satisfying conclusion to have some closure provided about that.

A safer way for police to test drug evidence

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). "A safer way for police to test drug evidence: What's in the bag?." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 17 September 2019. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/09/190917115455.htm>.

This article titled, “A safer way for police to test drug evidence” published with the help of research conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) examines a new method for police officers to field test drugs. The idea behind this new test is that police officers if they suspect the presence of drugs, can swipe the outside of the packaging and test that for contaminants, known as the ‘swipe method’. This is the same process used by TSA in airports when they carry out random checks on luggage looking for any residue of substances. This method is hopefully going to replace the scooping method, which has recently faded in popularity amongst police departments. The scooping method required officers to scoop a portion of the substance they were testing and drop it in a solution looking for a color change. This often caused safety problems so this new test for drug evidence should hopefully be safer and more efficient. During the research phase, they found that “swiping the outside of a package correctly predicted its contents 92% of the time. In cases involving fentanyl and other opioids, the outside of the package predicted the contents 100% of the time… The 8% of non-matches involved cases where several bags of different material were placed together by police into a single evidence bag, allowing for cross-contamination.”

This new technique for detecting drug evidence has the potential to be very important in the field of forensic science. In addition to the high accuracy rates in predicting the substance in the bag, many could argue that this research was a waste because the forensics lab could easily come to the same conclusions. This is true, however, if officers collect evidence and send it to the lab they would need a warrant first, but this new test can be conducted quickly and on the spot and if the substance tests positive the officers can make an arrest immediately. The new test could also be important in helping protect officers. Many powder-like drugs, when the storage unit is opened, can poof into the air, similar to flour, so this new technique is safer in that it eliminates the chance any of the drug escapes, into the air, since the officer is only swiping the side of the bag. 

Overall, I thought this article was well-written, extremely informative, and well supported by data. The authors do a really good job of highlighting their new method for testing drug evidence, and discussing how it would be used by police officers in the field. The article mentions how drugs are tested in the lab using the color test but that often fails with some of the new “designer drugs” on the market. The one thing I would change is that I would write more about some of the shortcomings of this test. While the data clearly points to it being helpful and accurate, I’m sure there are some areas researchers are looking to improve and the article does not really touch upon that. 

Lorelei Heath

Mr. Ippolito

Current Event 8

11.14.19

Bineth, Jessica. “Somerton Man: One of Australia's Most Baffling Cold Cases Could Be a Step Closer to Being Solved.” Somerton Man: One of Australia's Most Baffling Cold Cases Could Be a Step Closer to Being Solved - RN - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation), 2 Jan. 2018, 3:20,mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-14/somerton-man-cold-case-could-be-one-step-closer-to-solved/9245512.

When a John Doe appeared on a Beach in Adelaide, Australia on December 1st, 1948 with no belongings and no identification it becomes a mystery. To crack the case of the “Somerton Man”, detectives had to eliminate some possible reasons which lead to his death. Since they found no outward injuries, they believed it was a suicide. Later in the investigation, during the autopsy, they thought it was an unnatural death because they discovered internal bleeding, but no poison. Since there were no signs of poison, homicide was canceled out. A curious and devoted, Dereck Abbott, is trying to solve the case. Analyzing the Somerton Man’s file, Derek read that the police found one thing on him. It was a rolled-up piece of paper with the words, “Taman Shud”, which translates to “the end” or “finished”. This also led the police to rule it as a suicide. Which is what they did back in 1948. The book from the piece of paper, which was thrown into a business man’s car, was finally found. The back of the book contained code and a phone number. The police tracked the number to a nurse, Jo Thompson. The nurse had claimed she did not know the man, but when she saw the plaster of his body, she made a face as if she were to faint. Derek tried to track down the nurse from 1948 but she died of old age. Derek then found, who he thought, was the Somerton Man’s daughter, Rachel. They spent time together constantly and they lived happily ever after. 

Derek tried twice to have the Somerton Man’s body dug up and exhumed, but was denied the right to. He petitioned for this, to see if Rachal and her possible father did have the same DNA and to clarify his identity. After looking at the plaster he found DNA fragments that still had a way to compare them to Rachel’s. Derek had the DNA tested but the process would take a year to be correct. While he waited, he still petitioned to exhume the Somerton Man’s body. 

The story of the Somerton Man is one to remember. The article, I thought, wrote it very well and gave great, detailed information. The only thing I would correct was the lack of information about the forensic science they used to compare the DNA fragments, along with how exhuming a body works. Overall, the story was captivating and enjoyable, and I highly recommend reading it.  

The Amelia Earhart Mystery Stays Down in the Deep

Jimmy Hennessy 
Current Event 8Mr. IppolitoNovember 14th, 2019

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/14/science/amelia-earhart-robert-ballard.html

Cohn, Julie. “The Amelia Earhart Mystery Stays Down in the Deep.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 14 Oct. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/10/14/science/amelia-earhart-robert-ballard.html.

Written by Julie Cohn the article this article discusses the recent findings of Amelia Earhart and her plane. Robert Ballard, the ocean explorer famous for locating the wreck of the Titanic, led a team aboard the resesearch vessel Nautilus that discovered two hats in the depths. It found debris from an old shipwreck. It even spotted a soda can. What it did not find was a single piece of the Lockheed Electra airplane flown in 1937 by Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan, which vanished during their doomed voyage around the world. Dr. Hiebert’s team is hoping to use new techniques to identify evidence of mitochondrial DNA with similarities to Earhart’s living relatives in the 22 soil samples they collected. It is incredible how today we can still use small traces of DNA to try and track Earhart's body. 

              This article goes to show how important forensic evidence and developing technology is because it can have impacts 100 of years later. This article also did a nice job tying how important the DNA is to the case and how forensic made it possible.  I also liked how the article go to the point and was very clear.  At no point does the reader feel confused or bored.  Adding images also made the article very interesting.  

              If I Had to change this article I would just try and explain what the next step is in the research and investigation.  The article talked all about the past and what they found but failed to explain what is next. Overall, it was very interesting and I enjoyed it.