I saw a lot of people tweeting about this article yesterday. It's about a forensics examiner who lied about her credentials. Shame on her.... for more reasons than one.
The article mentions that when interviewed, she thought that only two of twelve jurors were required to find her guilty. She claimed that's why she plead guilty to the charges. Now listen, you could be the best forensic examiner in the world, but I quite frankly don't want you on the stand if you don't know how our legal system works. I mean seriously, just how good of an expert witness can you be?
Another thing that disturbed me about the article was the fact that she had worked on 10 cases for the indigent defense fund since 2006. These 10 cases resulted in payment of $23,000. But in 2000 she claimed to be billing $254/hr. Assuming that bill rate, she worked each case for 9 hours. I'll assume that a few of those cases plead out. But come on now, nine hours per case? To investigate and write the report? Seriously? What about trial prep for those cases that didn't plead out? If I am ever accused of a computer crime, I sincerely hope that my forensic examiner spends more than nine hours on my case.
This class act also said that in three years she can have her misdemeanor record expunged. That's a horrible thing to say on the record. The idea that she would ever work again in this field if laughable. Anyone who hires her after she lied about her credentials deserves a conviction. It's one thing to not know she's a fraud. It's another thing entirely to hire someone after you know they are willing to lie on the stand. Of course, if you are caught red handed and clearly guilty, maybe that's what you need...