評論
打印
Had the case gone to trial, jurors may well have convicted Anderson,
但是對被告人來說，這很難被稱為是一個小的錯誤。如果這個案子開庭審理，陪審團(tuán)很可能將安德森定罪，
as they did the other three defendants (a third man, Marcellous Drummer, was eventually arrested).
就像他們對其他被告人做的那樣（第三個人，馬賽洛斯·德魯默最終被捕）。
A 2008 study found that jurors rated DNA evidence as 95 percent accurate and 94 percent persuasive of a suspect's guilt.
2008年的一項(xiàng)研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，陪審團(tuán)認(rèn)為DNA證據(jù)95%的準(zhǔn)確性和94%的說服力可以證明嫌疑人有罪。
"We're desperately hoping that DNA will come in to save the day, but it's still fitting into a flawed system,"
紐約大學(xué)法學(xué)教授、《監(jiān)牢內(nèi)幕》一書的作者艾琳·E·墨菲說：
says Erin E. Murphy, a professor of law at New York University and author of Inside the Cell: The Dark Side of Forensic DNA.
“我們非常希望DNA能夠拯救這個世界，但它仍然符合一個有缺陷的系統(tǒng)，這就是法醫(yī)DNA的黑暗面。”
"If you don't bring in the appropriate amount of skepticism and restraint in using the method, there are going to be miscarriages of justice."
“如果在使用這種方法時沒有適當(dāng)?shù)膽岩珊涂酥疲蜁霈F(xiàn)誤判。”
Having narrowly escaped a terrible fate, Anderson himself has advice for law-enforcement officers: "There's more that's gotta be looked at than just the DNA," he says.
安德森僥幸逃脫了可怕的命運(yùn)，他給執(zhí)法官員提了建議：“除了DNA還有很多需要調(diào)查的地方。
"You've got to dig deeper. Reanalyze. Do everything all over again before you say, ‘This is what it is.' Because it may not necessarily be so."
“你必須進(jìn)行更深入的調(diào)查。再三分析。在你們說‘這就是事情的真相’之前，將所有事情再進(jìn)行一遍。因?yàn)槭虑槲幢厥沁@樣的。”
