WEBVTT - Part Two: The Bastards of Forensic Science

0:00:01.840 --> 0:00:09.400
<v Speaker 1>Also media.

0:00:12.880 --> 0:00:15.840
<v Speaker 2>That is the funniest thing anyone has ever said on

0:00:15.880 --> 0:00:17.840
<v Speaker 2>this show, and we're going to have to I mean,

0:00:17.880 --> 0:00:22.119
<v Speaker 2>obviously we've already edited it out because it's also definitely

0:00:22.160 --> 0:00:27.360
<v Speaker 2>an actionable threat against what I can't believe, Gava, is

0:00:27.360 --> 0:00:29.480
<v Speaker 2>that you even had their home address.

0:00:29.720 --> 0:00:32.560
<v Speaker 3>Wow, what a bit you know. You learn these things

0:00:32.600 --> 0:00:34.959
<v Speaker 3>when you're a doctor. It's important to know as much

0:00:34.960 --> 0:00:35.840
<v Speaker 3>about someone as.

0:00:35.720 --> 0:00:41.720
<v Speaker 2>You can m hopefully anyway, welcome back to part two, everybody.

0:00:41.800 --> 0:00:44.960
<v Speaker 2>This is Behind the Bastards, a podcast where every week

0:00:45.040 --> 0:00:48.560
<v Speaker 2>we get as close to getting our guests, doctor Cavajda

0:00:48.920 --> 0:00:52.000
<v Speaker 2>in trouble with the authorities as possible without actually doing

0:00:52.000 --> 0:00:55.840
<v Speaker 2>it thanks to the kind of happened one of these days.

0:00:56.600 --> 0:01:00.520
<v Speaker 3>Thank you for having me back, Tava. Yes, Robert, how

0:01:00.520 --> 0:01:00.760
<v Speaker 3>do you?

0:01:00.840 --> 0:01:04.200
<v Speaker 2>How do you feel so far talking about bitemark analysis?

0:01:05.480 --> 0:01:08.480
<v Speaker 3>I think it's really interesting. I think forensic quote unquote

0:01:08.520 --> 0:01:12.840
<v Speaker 3>science is a fascinating topic because it's such an important

0:01:12.840 --> 0:01:16.080
<v Speaker 3>part of our legal system. And as we discussed in

0:01:16.080 --> 0:01:17.520
<v Speaker 3>the first episode, if you haven't listened to it, you

0:01:17.520 --> 0:01:18.880
<v Speaker 3>should go back and listen to it. Like, why are

0:01:18.880 --> 0:01:22.600
<v Speaker 3>you listening to this one? What do you do? Your maniac?

0:01:22.640 --> 0:01:24.200
<v Speaker 3>But I kind of dig it too, So if that's

0:01:24.240 --> 0:01:27.080
<v Speaker 3>your thing, then I'm down with it. But also a

0:01:27.200 --> 0:01:31.000
<v Speaker 3>short I think it's really fascinating to like see how

0:01:31.120 --> 0:01:33.320
<v Speaker 3>some of these things that aren't really based in the

0:01:33.640 --> 0:01:36.760
<v Speaker 3>science as I would see it and as I'm used to,

0:01:38.160 --> 0:01:42.400
<v Speaker 3>how it's grown and how it's used unfortunately in these

0:01:42.480 --> 0:01:45.240
<v Speaker 3>really tragic cases. And I'm assuming you probably have more

0:01:45.640 --> 0:01:49.080
<v Speaker 3>of people being, you know, sent to prison for crimes

0:01:49.080 --> 0:01:52.800
<v Speaker 3>that did not commit and and it's it's a really

0:01:52.800 --> 0:01:54.360
<v Speaker 3>interesting time to do it too. And I don't know

0:01:54.400 --> 0:01:56.120
<v Speaker 3>if you can go into this. You probably aren't, but

0:01:56.520 --> 0:02:01.040
<v Speaker 3>you know, because we're O. J. Simpson died recently, and

0:02:01.160 --> 0:02:03.600
<v Speaker 3>in his case, there was a lot of DNA evidence.

0:02:04.120 --> 0:02:08.079
<v Speaker 3>And I'm not like an og Simpson like official by

0:02:08.080 --> 0:02:09.840
<v Speaker 3>any chance. I don't know much about that case, but

0:02:09.880 --> 0:02:11.960
<v Speaker 3>I know there was DNA evidence, and it seems like

0:02:12.000 --> 0:02:15.520
<v Speaker 3>it was around ninety four when it was still pretty

0:02:15.560 --> 0:02:17.840
<v Speaker 3>new to people, and I don't think people really knew

0:02:17.840 --> 0:02:21.040
<v Speaker 3>that much about DNA evidence at the time, so I

0:02:21.400 --> 0:02:24.119
<v Speaker 3>think like it could have made a pretty big difference

0:02:24.400 --> 0:02:26.760
<v Speaker 3>his case, maybe if it was done now as opposed

0:02:26.760 --> 0:02:29.680
<v Speaker 3>to then, for example, And that's like part of forensic

0:02:29.720 --> 0:02:34.000
<v Speaker 3>science as opposed to like bitemarks, which in maybe fingerprinting,

0:02:34.040 --> 0:02:36.960
<v Speaker 3>which seemed a little bit softer in that regard of science.

0:02:37.040 --> 0:02:40.519
<v Speaker 3>So I think it's really fascinating. I'm not bummed out yet,

0:02:40.840 --> 0:02:41.360
<v Speaker 3>although there.

0:02:41.240 --> 0:02:45.200
<v Speaker 2>Are tragic there's some sad aspects. I just got sent

0:02:45.280 --> 0:02:49.240
<v Speaker 2>to prison for thirty years. Who was innocent? Yeah I

0:02:49.240 --> 0:02:51.240
<v Speaker 2>sound now, I sound like a fucking monster, thank.

0:02:51.040 --> 0:02:51.520
<v Speaker 3>You very much.

0:02:51.680 --> 0:02:55.200
<v Speaker 2>Just an innocent man.

0:02:56.120 --> 0:03:00.679
<v Speaker 3>We're just innocent men like that. One mean, but I do.

0:03:01.360 --> 0:03:03.160
<v Speaker 3>But but I do think it's a really interesting topic

0:03:03.200 --> 0:03:05.239
<v Speaker 3>and I think it's a super important one. So I'm glad. Yeah,

0:03:05.280 --> 0:03:06.200
<v Speaker 3>I'm glad you're doing it.

0:03:06.880 --> 0:03:08.920
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I you know, Actually, Kava, I have I have

0:03:08.919 --> 0:03:11.160
<v Speaker 2>a different opinion about the O. J. Simpson case than

0:03:11.200 --> 0:03:13.600
<v Speaker 2>a lot of people. I half watched that TV show

0:03:13.639 --> 0:03:16.360
<v Speaker 2>about it a few years back, and I was I

0:03:16.440 --> 0:03:18.720
<v Speaker 2>was kind of fucked up at the time. But I

0:03:18.720 --> 0:03:21.840
<v Speaker 2>I currently believe that Ross from Friends was the murderer.

0:03:22.240 --> 0:03:25.040
<v Speaker 2>That would make sense, that would answer the way he

0:03:25.160 --> 0:03:27.720
<v Speaker 2>kept saying. Juice just didn't sit right with me.

0:03:28.600 --> 0:03:31.720
<v Speaker 3>Quick quick aside, Did you know that O. J. Simpson

0:03:31.840 --> 0:03:35.400
<v Speaker 3>had like a prank show? Yeah? And like it was

0:03:35.600 --> 0:03:38.720
<v Speaker 3>this terrible, terrible prank show made no sense. It was

0:03:39.000 --> 0:03:42.920
<v Speaker 3>so silly and stupid, and like the catch line was, hey,

0:03:43.080 --> 0:03:45.400
<v Speaker 3>you've been juiced, like when he come out.

0:03:45.520 --> 0:03:48.520
<v Speaker 2>It's so funny, man, that's that's that's great.

0:03:49.040 --> 0:03:51.720
<v Speaker 1>Robert likes to bring up that Ross from Friends played

0:03:51.800 --> 0:03:54.600
<v Speaker 1>Robert Kardashian and that Ojy.

0:03:54.040 --> 0:03:56.440
<v Speaker 2>One of the funniest pieces of casting ever.

0:03:56.320 --> 0:03:59.320
<v Speaker 1>Because like get up, often it might be just a

0:03:59.440 --> 0:04:02.440
<v Speaker 1>Roman and if the Roman Empire, was it your Roman Empire?

0:04:02.680 --> 0:04:06.920
<v Speaker 2>Well, the problem is that specifically Ross from Friends shouldn't

0:04:06.960 --> 0:04:09.840
<v Speaker 2>be allowed to play other people because he's always just

0:04:09.920 --> 0:04:12.160
<v Speaker 2>gonna be rot You. I can't believe you as Robert

0:04:12.240 --> 0:04:16.400
<v Speaker 2>Kardashian's screaming juice at your friend. I believe the guy

0:04:16.440 --> 0:04:19.080
<v Speaker 2>who played OJ is OJ. He was great, but you're

0:04:19.160 --> 0:04:21.960
<v Speaker 2>just You're always Ross from Friends. Now, I'm sorry, I'm not.

0:04:22.080 --> 0:04:23.720
<v Speaker 2>You're a millionaire. It's fine.

0:04:23.800 --> 0:04:26.599
<v Speaker 3>He's okay with it, I'm sure. Yeah, like Leonard Nimoy

0:04:26.720 --> 0:04:29.640
<v Speaker 3>is okay or was okay being Spock. I think at

0:04:29.640 --> 0:04:31.039
<v Speaker 3>some point he got used to it.

0:04:31.480 --> 0:04:33.800
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, he made peace with it. Judging by the titles

0:04:33.800 --> 0:04:35.120
<v Speaker 2>of his biography, you.

0:04:35.040 --> 0:04:37.760
<v Speaker 1>Can't be anything else but one thing. That's what you're

0:04:37.760 --> 0:04:40.480
<v Speaker 1>doing to this person to ross from friends.

0:04:40.520 --> 0:04:44.560
<v Speaker 2>Yes, that's what he is, and he's a murderer. I

0:04:44.600 --> 0:04:45.120
<v Speaker 2>think so.

0:04:45.279 --> 0:04:45.479
<v Speaker 3>Well.

0:04:46.480 --> 0:04:49.960
<v Speaker 2>We just finished our episode talking about people versus Marx,

0:04:50.000 --> 0:04:52.880
<v Speaker 2>which is kind of the the this this court case

0:04:52.920 --> 0:04:56.800
<v Speaker 2>that really helps to like provide the popular grounding for

0:04:56.880 --> 0:05:02.560
<v Speaker 2>bitemark analysis as a thing that's real. Now, this case established.

0:05:03.279 --> 0:05:06.400
<v Speaker 2>At the time that this case was adjudicated, the established

0:05:06.440 --> 0:05:09.560
<v Speaker 2>practice was that scientific evidence should not be accepted into

0:05:09.600 --> 0:05:13.120
<v Speaker 2>a court case unless the said evidence was generally accepted

0:05:13.200 --> 0:05:17.000
<v Speaker 2>by the relevant scientific community. This was known as the

0:05:17.120 --> 0:05:20.520
<v Speaker 2>Fry test. Based on the court case that established the standard. Again,

0:05:20.560 --> 0:05:24.279
<v Speaker 2>we're all talking about like matters of precedent here. Bitemark analysis,

0:05:24.279 --> 0:05:26.880
<v Speaker 2>like the kind performed by Veil and Levine in this

0:05:27.000 --> 0:05:31.680
<v Speaker 2>case was not based on generally accepted odontological science, because

0:05:32.520 --> 0:05:35.000
<v Speaker 2>why would odontologists have done this right? Like, it's not

0:05:35.040 --> 0:05:38.440
<v Speaker 2>really relevant to most of like dentistry even to like

0:05:38.560 --> 0:05:41.400
<v Speaker 2>trying to do this thing right. It's just there wasn't

0:05:42.240 --> 0:05:45.720
<v Speaker 2>an established kind of practice around how you should do this.

0:05:46.440 --> 0:05:49.479
<v Speaker 2>But an exception was made to the Fry test based

0:05:49.520 --> 0:05:53.360
<v Speaker 2>on the reasoning that bitemark matching was so simple any

0:05:53.520 --> 0:05:55.880
<v Speaker 2>lay juror could look at a cast of a bite

0:05:56.120 --> 0:05:58.440
<v Speaker 2>and a cast of a perps teeth and tell if

0:05:58.480 --> 0:06:01.920
<v Speaker 2>they matched. Because the eyeball test could tell if a

0:06:02.000 --> 0:06:04.960
<v Speaker 2>bite mark matched a set of teeth, it should be

0:06:05.000 --> 0:06:09.360
<v Speaker 2>admitted into court case right, And like you can see

0:06:09.400 --> 0:06:14.080
<v Speaker 2>how like the stereotypical layman who's you know, dumb might

0:06:15.120 --> 0:06:19.120
<v Speaker 2>buy that. But also I feel like maybe this is

0:06:19.160 --> 0:06:21.560
<v Speaker 2>just a matter of like it happened at a different time,

0:06:21.560 --> 0:06:24.159
<v Speaker 2>because when I read that, I want to scream inside,

0:06:24.480 --> 0:06:26.599
<v Speaker 2>like no, they can't, No, they can't. Why would you

0:06:26.600 --> 0:06:29.159
<v Speaker 2>think people could match a bite to a cast of teeth.

0:06:29.240 --> 0:06:30.560
<v Speaker 2>That doesn't make any sense at all.

0:06:30.640 --> 0:06:34.120
<v Speaker 3>Fuck you. I think our faith in people has really

0:06:34.160 --> 0:06:37.240
<v Speaker 3>just gone down in general, is what I'm hearing here.

0:06:37.240 --> 0:06:40.520
<v Speaker 3>And I can't disagree with it. But it does, on

0:06:40.560 --> 0:06:43.919
<v Speaker 3>the surface seem very reasonable. It's like, Okay, well, this

0:06:44.000 --> 0:06:45.680
<v Speaker 3>is a very simple imprint. If this person has a

0:06:45.720 --> 0:06:49.040
<v Speaker 3>really weird, like shit mouth, you should line it up

0:06:49.040 --> 0:06:51.640
<v Speaker 3>with these things. It seems like it would make sense.

0:06:51.760 --> 0:06:55.120
<v Speaker 3>It's like to the general public, I could totally see that.

0:06:55.480 --> 0:06:59.440
<v Speaker 2>I understand, like how this whole disastrous train of events

0:06:59.680 --> 0:07:02.440
<v Speaker 2>like got moving right, How the momentum got built up

0:07:02.440 --> 0:07:05.960
<v Speaker 2>behind it, so you know, the eyeball test. This is

0:07:06.000 --> 0:07:08.400
<v Speaker 2>going to wind up being kind of like it. It's

0:07:08.400 --> 0:07:11.360
<v Speaker 2>sort of a disaster that this gets established as a

0:07:11.400 --> 0:07:14.720
<v Speaker 2>way to verify whether or not a new forensic science

0:07:14.800 --> 0:07:18.720
<v Speaker 2>should be trusted, because it creates this very dangerous situation.

0:07:19.400 --> 0:07:23.280
<v Speaker 2>After Marx, a whole host of new kinds of experts

0:07:23.400 --> 0:07:27.480
<v Speaker 2>start coming forward using different kinds of pattern matching forensic

0:07:27.560 --> 0:07:31.480
<v Speaker 2>techniques like matching shoe prints or tire trends or bits

0:07:31.480 --> 0:07:35.160
<v Speaker 2>of hair based on visual signs. Alone, this bitemark analysis

0:07:35.160 --> 0:07:39.680
<v Speaker 2>case people versus Marx, it opens the floodgates on a

0:07:39.760 --> 0:07:43.280
<v Speaker 2>lot of nonsense getting introduced as forensic science. And the

0:07:43.880 --> 0:07:46.000
<v Speaker 2>positive side of this is we get a shitload of

0:07:46.040 --> 0:07:49.680
<v Speaker 2>TV shows based on forensic analysis. Right, this is where

0:07:49.720 --> 0:07:51.680
<v Speaker 2>all of them come from, this idea that there's all

0:07:51.720 --> 0:07:54.480
<v Speaker 2>these every crime scene, there's all these little clues and

0:07:54.520 --> 0:07:57.240
<v Speaker 2>you can, you know, you could, any little thing can

0:07:57.280 --> 0:07:59.120
<v Speaker 2>match the shoeprints. You can do this and like, none

0:07:59.120 --> 0:08:01.600
<v Speaker 2>of this stuff works. It either doesn't work at all

0:08:01.720 --> 0:08:04.560
<v Speaker 2>or it doesn't work as well. As the experts who

0:08:04.640 --> 0:08:07.720
<v Speaker 2>make their living based on convincing you it works perfectly

0:08:07.800 --> 0:08:11.200
<v Speaker 2>are going to claim and because they've now reset the

0:08:11.280 --> 0:08:15.400
<v Speaker 2>standard from forensic science has to be generally accepted in

0:08:15.440 --> 0:08:18.080
<v Speaker 2>the field to like, well, if it's an eyeball sort

0:08:18.080 --> 0:08:20.400
<v Speaker 2>of thing, you can introduce it. You know, it looks

0:08:20.440 --> 0:08:21.040
<v Speaker 2>good enough.

0:08:21.240 --> 0:08:23.160
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, it's kind of like what we talked about too before,

0:08:23.200 --> 0:08:26.160
<v Speaker 3>which is like I think, like in general, in terms

0:08:26.240 --> 0:08:30.000
<v Speaker 3>of law, they if something's been set once, then it lasts.

0:08:30.040 --> 0:08:33.120
<v Speaker 3>It's this precedent. But like, on top of that, like

0:08:33.240 --> 0:08:36.920
<v Speaker 3>judges are probably more willing to allow things than to

0:08:37.160 --> 0:08:40.720
<v Speaker 3>keep things out of the trial if they don't understand it.

0:08:40.800 --> 0:08:44.520
<v Speaker 3>Because if someone can present a you know, convincing enough

0:08:44.920 --> 0:08:47.320
<v Speaker 3>argument that sounds like they know what they're talking about,

0:08:47.400 --> 0:08:49.160
<v Speaker 3>I can see why a judge would be like, oh, Okay,

0:08:49.160 --> 0:08:51.760
<v Speaker 3>this guy sounds smart enough. Well we'll leave it in

0:08:51.840 --> 0:08:53.800
<v Speaker 3>and the jury can do what they will with it.

0:08:54.600 --> 0:08:54.800
<v Speaker 1>Yeah.

0:08:55.360 --> 0:08:59.000
<v Speaker 2>It makes me think like rewatching Star Trek the next Generation,

0:08:59.120 --> 0:09:01.760
<v Speaker 2>as I'm usually doing. We're very lucky that all of

0:09:01.760 --> 0:09:05.400
<v Speaker 2>those screenwriters went to Hollywood rather than decided to do this,

0:09:05.559 --> 0:09:08.680
<v Speaker 2>because they could have created some technobabble bullshit that would

0:09:08.679 --> 0:09:14.319
<v Speaker 2>have locked a lot of people away. Yeah, whoever was

0:09:14.360 --> 0:09:17.920
<v Speaker 2>writing Jordie's dialogue could have been very dangerous in another career.

0:09:18.880 --> 0:09:20.240
<v Speaker 2>This is the second show I've.

0:09:20.120 --> 0:09:22.600
<v Speaker 3>Done with you where we get into the Star Trek.

0:09:22.640 --> 0:09:25.480
<v Speaker 3>I feel like we should just do a whole episode

0:09:25.559 --> 0:09:27.240
<v Speaker 3>on Star Trek the Next Generation.

0:09:27.920 --> 0:09:30.000
<v Speaker 2>There's nothing I'd love more. But I feel like there's

0:09:30.000 --> 0:09:34.080
<v Speaker 2>also a million of those shows. Look listeners, find a rich,

0:09:34.120 --> 0:09:37.080
<v Speaker 2>crazy person who will pay for me to do a

0:09:37.120 --> 0:09:39.760
<v Speaker 2>show on Star Trek the Next Generation, and I'll do it.

0:09:39.840 --> 0:09:42.880
<v Speaker 2>But I feel like there's there's a lot of that anyway.

0:09:43.480 --> 0:09:47.640
<v Speaker 2>So after Mars, the burden of proof when you're introducing

0:09:47.720 --> 0:09:50.960
<v Speaker 2>science into a lot of these cases has shifted drastically.

0:09:51.360 --> 0:09:53.560
<v Speaker 2>No longer do experts have to show their processes in

0:09:53.559 --> 0:09:57.160
<v Speaker 2>line with an established scientific field. The burden of proof

0:09:57.200 --> 0:09:59.480
<v Speaker 2>is on the defense attorney to create doubt against the

0:09:59.559 --> 0:10:03.079
<v Speaker 2>claims of an expert. The successive dentists like Levine and

0:10:03.160 --> 0:10:05.160
<v Speaker 2>Veil opened the floodgates to a whole host of men

0:10:05.200 --> 0:10:08.040
<v Speaker 2>who read and less qualified, pushing to convict people based

0:10:08.040 --> 0:10:11.440
<v Speaker 2>on analysis that is even less scientific. In the reality

0:10:11.559 --> 0:10:15.840
<v Speaker 2>of bitemark analysis is that it was always questionable. Harward,

0:10:15.920 --> 0:10:18.680
<v Speaker 2>the Navy man that Levine got convicted after arguing that

0:10:19.040 --> 0:10:23.000
<v Speaker 2>only he could have bit Terresa Peronne was ultimately proven

0:10:23.080 --> 0:10:26.680
<v Speaker 2>innocent and released after losing thirty years of his life

0:10:26.679 --> 0:10:29.840
<v Speaker 2>to the criminal justice system, and a lot more people

0:10:29.920 --> 0:10:32.760
<v Speaker 2>lose precious time as a result of this bullshit, sometimes

0:10:32.800 --> 0:10:35.320
<v Speaker 2>all the time that they had thanks to the fountain

0:10:35.360 --> 0:10:37.520
<v Speaker 2>of forensic conmen enabled by people v.

0:10:37.640 --> 0:10:38.000
<v Speaker 3>Marx.

0:10:38.360 --> 0:10:43.000
<v Speaker 2>Fabricant cites this infuriating story in his book Junk Science Quote.

0:10:43.400 --> 0:10:46.480
<v Speaker 2>The Connecticut Supreme Court adopted the eyeball test and state v.

0:10:46.520 --> 0:10:49.960
<v Speaker 2>Mark Read a rape conviction involving the use of hair microscopy,

0:10:50.080 --> 0:10:53.320
<v Speaker 2>a technique that matches two hairs together through visual observation

0:10:53.480 --> 0:10:57.000
<v Speaker 2>of the interior characteristics of human hair. Hair matching evidence

0:10:57.040 --> 0:11:00.280
<v Speaker 2>was admissible not because it had been scientifically validated, but

0:11:00.280 --> 0:11:02.719
<v Speaker 2>because jurors were free to make their own determinations as

0:11:02.760 --> 0:11:05.040
<v Speaker 2>to the weight they would accord the expert's testimony and

0:11:05.120 --> 0:11:07.599
<v Speaker 2>light of the photograph and their own powers of observation

0:11:07.720 --> 0:11:11.360
<v Speaker 2>and comparison. Ten years later, DNA proved that the jurors

0:11:11.400 --> 0:11:14.160
<v Speaker 2>powers of observation had led to Mark Reid's wrongful conviction.

0:11:14.480 --> 0:11:18.280
<v Speaker 2>He was innocent. The negroid hair a racist and anachronism

0:11:18.440 --> 0:11:21.679
<v Speaker 2>still used in forensics today. Match to Read was in

0:11:21.679 --> 0:11:24.480
<v Speaker 2>fact the pubic hair of his accuser, the white woman

0:11:24.480 --> 0:11:27.199
<v Speaker 2>who had identified Read a black man as her rapist.

0:11:27.480 --> 0:11:30.920
<v Speaker 3>Oh my god, that's disgusting. Oh my god. Yes, that's

0:11:31.000 --> 0:11:34.720
<v Speaker 3>just real bad. That's just just give me a moment.

0:11:36.040 --> 0:11:38.240
<v Speaker 2>Let's all sit with that for a second.

0:11:38.360 --> 0:11:40.600
<v Speaker 3>Damn it. That's so rough on so many levels.

0:11:41.000 --> 0:11:43.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's it's I mean part of why. And again,

0:11:43.760 --> 0:11:45.440
<v Speaker 2>the primary reason this is bad is because a lot

0:11:45.440 --> 0:11:47.800
<v Speaker 2>of innocent people are getting convicted. The other reason it's

0:11:47.800 --> 0:11:50.680
<v Speaker 2>bad is because outside of these quacks doing hair matching,

0:11:51.200 --> 0:11:55.200
<v Speaker 2>there are people who are really trying hard and using

0:11:55.320 --> 0:11:59.560
<v Speaker 2>scientific methods to try and catch murderers and rapists, which

0:11:59.600 --> 0:12:04.160
<v Speaker 2>is import And this also it makes it impossible to

0:12:04.160 --> 0:12:06.920
<v Speaker 2>trust them, you know, the way that we should be

0:12:06.960 --> 0:12:09.480
<v Speaker 2>able to. That's part of why that like this is

0:12:09.520 --> 0:12:13.959
<v Speaker 2>so comprehensively vile. What's happened with this industry of grifters

0:12:14.000 --> 0:12:16.599
<v Speaker 2>that have subsumed forensic sciences?

0:12:17.280 --> 0:12:19.520
<v Speaker 3>Can I ask a question, and yeah, this is probably

0:12:19.520 --> 0:12:23.320
<v Speaker 3>not something you're privy to, but do they ever in

0:12:23.440 --> 0:12:25.839
<v Speaker 3>your reading or research for this, did you ever come

0:12:25.880 --> 0:12:28.760
<v Speaker 3>across a case of an expert like in one of

0:12:28.800 --> 0:12:33.160
<v Speaker 3>these like soft sciences here forensic sciences that was then

0:12:33.280 --> 0:12:36.439
<v Speaker 3>later like asked about a case that had been overturned

0:12:36.440 --> 0:12:39.120
<v Speaker 3>because of DNA and did they ever like did they

0:12:39.200 --> 0:12:40.840
<v Speaker 3>still try to fight it or were they like, yeah,

0:12:40.840 --> 0:12:42.480
<v Speaker 3>it was a mistake, we made a mistake. Was there

0:12:42.520 --> 0:12:43.719
<v Speaker 3>any response from them?

0:12:43.800 --> 0:12:47.360
<v Speaker 2>Like usually usually no response. I can't find a single

0:12:47.360 --> 0:12:49.200
<v Speaker 2>case of a guy being like, oh, yeah, you know what,

0:12:49.240 --> 0:12:51.360
<v Speaker 2>I horribly fucked up and my entire life has been

0:12:51.400 --> 0:12:51.760
<v Speaker 2>a lie.

0:12:52.600 --> 0:12:54.719
<v Speaker 3>Well, I guess And when you say it like that,

0:12:54.800 --> 0:12:56.200
<v Speaker 3>I guess it makes sense why they don't do it,

0:12:56.200 --> 0:12:57.080
<v Speaker 3>but like, yeah.

0:12:56.960 --> 0:13:01.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I you know, I don't know, because it's tough

0:13:01.440 --> 0:13:06.880
<v Speaker 2>because like, again, there are real you have to if

0:13:06.880 --> 0:13:09.800
<v Speaker 2>somebody is out there committing rapes and murders, they should

0:13:09.800 --> 0:13:12.320
<v Speaker 2>be identified and stopped. And there are going to be

0:13:12.360 --> 0:13:15.960
<v Speaker 2>different scientific techniques that are developed over time that will

0:13:16.000 --> 0:13:20.040
<v Speaker 2>allow to make those kinds of identifications. And just because

0:13:20.080 --> 0:13:22.120
<v Speaker 2>the people doing it are human, they will fuck up

0:13:22.160 --> 0:13:25.839
<v Speaker 2>sometimes without it being them being irresponsible, just because people

0:13:25.840 --> 0:13:29.640
<v Speaker 2>are imperfect, right the same way that doctors will fail

0:13:29.679 --> 0:13:32.920
<v Speaker 2>to save patients who could have been saved because you know,

0:13:32.960 --> 0:13:36.120
<v Speaker 2>that's just that's the reality of the world. But at

0:13:36.120 --> 0:13:38.280
<v Speaker 2>the same time, when I read about cases like this

0:13:38.400 --> 0:13:40.959
<v Speaker 2>with people doing this bullshit, Like you think you hear

0:13:41.080 --> 0:13:43.199
<v Speaker 2>hair matching, you think like, oh, well, they're probably getting

0:13:43.240 --> 0:13:45.199
<v Speaker 2>DNA from the hair and match again. No, they're looking

0:13:45.200 --> 0:13:46.920
<v Speaker 2>at two hairs and saying, well, this is clearly a

0:13:46.960 --> 0:13:49.520
<v Speaker 2>negroid hair. That guy should do as much prison time

0:13:49.559 --> 0:13:51.240
<v Speaker 2>as the guy who got wrongfully convicted.

0:13:51.760 --> 0:13:54.600
<v Speaker 3>You know, if COVID taught us nothing else, it's that

0:13:54.640 --> 0:13:57.480
<v Speaker 3>you have to the people you should trust the most

0:13:57.760 --> 0:14:00.320
<v Speaker 3>in terms of the expert opinions are the ones that

0:14:00.400 --> 0:14:04.079
<v Speaker 3>admit when there is limitations and when there's some doubt.

0:14:04.240 --> 0:14:06.760
<v Speaker 3>When anyone tells you this is the exact answer to

0:14:06.840 --> 0:14:09.520
<v Speaker 3>a novel or new issue, you have to take that

0:14:09.600 --> 0:14:12.640
<v Speaker 3>with a grain of salt, because nobody wants to bring

0:14:12.679 --> 0:14:16.920
<v Speaker 3>on like that, that person onto their show, Like No, CNN, Fox.

0:14:16.960 --> 0:14:18.520
<v Speaker 3>They don't want to bring someone onto the show that

0:14:18.760 --> 0:14:20.160
<v Speaker 3>said like, well, you know, there's a lot we don't

0:14:20.160 --> 0:14:21.880
<v Speaker 3>know yet, we're still trying to figure it out. They

0:14:21.920 --> 0:14:24.240
<v Speaker 3>bring on the person that's like, oh, the answer to

0:14:24.280 --> 0:14:26.640
<v Speaker 3>this is don't rub your eyeballs, And that's one hundred

0:14:26.640 --> 0:14:28.560
<v Speaker 3>percent the way that's going to keep you from getting

0:14:28.640 --> 0:14:30.160
<v Speaker 3>sick with Covid et cetera.

0:14:30.680 --> 0:14:32.880
<v Speaker 2>It's the same thing that happened. You know, we just

0:14:33.000 --> 0:14:37.080
<v Speaker 2>had this case where Israel struck an Iranian embassy in

0:14:37.120 --> 0:14:42.200
<v Speaker 2>Syria and Iran responded by firing missiles and drones into Israel.

0:14:42.320 --> 0:14:46.600
<v Speaker 2>And online when all this started, the number of people

0:14:46.640 --> 0:14:50.640
<v Speaker 2>who are like, this is World War III, right, is like,

0:14:51.080 --> 0:14:53.200
<v Speaker 2>you can wait. You can wait to know. Like, not

0:14:53.280 --> 0:14:56.360
<v Speaker 2>that it's not important to care about this, but you

0:14:56.600 --> 0:15:00.880
<v Speaker 2>sitting at home in fucking Saint Louis, Missouri, you don't

0:15:01.000 --> 0:15:03.840
<v Speaker 2>need to have an opinion about what the fallout for

0:15:03.880 --> 0:15:05.720
<v Speaker 2>this is going to be the night that it happens.

0:15:05.760 --> 0:15:07.360
<v Speaker 2>Just give it a day or two until we know

0:15:07.520 --> 0:15:12.960
<v Speaker 2>some more about what's actually happening, right, you know that's

0:15:13.040 --> 0:15:15.120
<v Speaker 2>that's I I people.

0:15:15.480 --> 0:15:17.040
<v Speaker 3>Sophie has a look on her face. I think I

0:15:17.080 --> 0:15:18.080
<v Speaker 3>know what she's going to add here.

0:15:18.360 --> 0:15:20.760
<v Speaker 4>Oh, I'm waiting to see if you'll do it.

0:15:21.480 --> 0:15:24.320
<v Speaker 3>Listen, I'm not going to correct the way he says Iran.

0:15:25.120 --> 0:15:28.320
<v Speaker 3>You know what, I petitioned that we now we now

0:15:28.360 --> 0:15:34.000
<v Speaker 3>refer to Iran as Iran and Iranian because I love

0:15:34.080 --> 0:15:36.440
<v Speaker 3>Robert that much. Okay, you hear that out there? So

0:15:36.520 --> 0:15:41.920
<v Speaker 3>people are out there stop messaging, please, please please stop

0:15:41.960 --> 0:15:46.360
<v Speaker 3>messaging me to correct the way Robert says Iran. I

0:15:47.240 --> 0:15:49.360
<v Speaker 3>I love the way he says it. I've given up.

0:15:49.720 --> 0:15:54.440
<v Speaker 2>Thank you, thank you, thank you. In response to that,

0:15:54.800 --> 0:15:56.200
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to make it. I'm going to make a

0:15:56.240 --> 0:15:58.400
<v Speaker 2>grand gesture that I think might be able to heal

0:15:58.560 --> 0:16:02.560
<v Speaker 2>some of the damage in this world. Austin, Texas now

0:16:02.560 --> 0:16:06.880
<v Speaker 2>a suburb of Tehran. Oh, I think it's a good idea.

0:16:06.960 --> 0:16:08.800
<v Speaker 2>I think the tacos that are going to come out

0:16:08.800 --> 0:16:10.200
<v Speaker 2>of this will be incredible.

0:16:10.320 --> 0:16:13.280
<v Speaker 3>Oh my god, the food that will come out of us. Listen,

0:16:13.280 --> 0:16:14.720
<v Speaker 3>you can't take the food from us. You can say

0:16:14.720 --> 0:16:16.360
<v Speaker 3>a lot about us, but you can't take our food

0:16:16.360 --> 0:16:17.920
<v Speaker 3>from us. And you put us in Austin, I bet

0:16:17.960 --> 0:16:19.640
<v Speaker 3>you will make some magic happen.

0:16:20.040 --> 0:16:22.920
<v Speaker 2>I know the kinds of barbecue science that will come

0:16:22.960 --> 0:16:26.720
<v Speaker 2>out of this set still be a marriage outstanding.

0:16:27.160 --> 0:16:27.760
<v Speaker 3>Yes.

0:16:28.360 --> 0:16:34.320
<v Speaker 2>Anyway, back to bite mark analysis. So in those early publications,

0:16:34.360 --> 0:16:36.920
<v Speaker 2>a bite mark analysis that before they actually got this

0:16:37.000 --> 0:16:39.360
<v Speaker 2>sort of up and running as a quote unquote science,

0:16:39.720 --> 0:16:42.760
<v Speaker 2>Levine and his cohorts had had acknowledged that there are

0:16:42.800 --> 0:16:45.760
<v Speaker 2>issues you can't really analyze bites in soft tissue. The

0:16:45.800 --> 0:16:48.120
<v Speaker 2>way that you can analyze bites in cartilage, which is

0:16:48.120 --> 0:16:50.440
<v Speaker 2>why they were so excited about the Marks case, right

0:16:50.480 --> 0:16:52.680
<v Speaker 2>because it was a good what's called a three dimensional

0:16:52.720 --> 0:16:55.640
<v Speaker 2>bite that they could actually cast. But as soon as

0:16:55.720 --> 0:16:59.840
<v Speaker 2>bite mark analysis is accepted as forensic science, they dropped

0:16:59.840 --> 0:17:03.240
<v Speaker 2>the whole Well, soft tissue bite marks aren't really you

0:17:03.280 --> 0:17:07.000
<v Speaker 2>can't really analyze them reliably, and just started going a

0:17:07.000 --> 0:17:11.800
<v Speaker 2>hog wild with identifications. Veil, the dentist from the Marx case,

0:17:12.160 --> 0:17:15.280
<v Speaker 2>testified two years later, this time as a certified member

0:17:15.320 --> 0:17:19.200
<v Speaker 2>of the AAFS Forensic Odontology Branch, about a bitemark and

0:17:19.280 --> 0:17:22.640
<v Speaker 2>a young murder victim's thigh. This was exactly the kind

0:17:22.680 --> 0:17:25.120
<v Speaker 2>of bite that earlier had been acknowledged as a bad

0:17:25.200 --> 0:17:28.720
<v Speaker 2>fit for analysis, but now the court praised the superior

0:17:28.800 --> 0:17:33.760
<v Speaker 2>trustworthiness over scientific bitemark analysis rather than less reliable kinds

0:17:33.760 --> 0:17:37.320
<v Speaker 2>of forensic science. The reality is that there was very

0:17:37.320 --> 0:17:40.280
<v Speaker 2>little science of any kind around bite marks. Once the

0:17:40.440 --> 0:17:43.320
<v Speaker 2>nucleus of forensic dentists had there any placed for themselves

0:17:43.320 --> 0:17:45.959
<v Speaker 2>in the AAFS, they set up a forensic board and

0:17:46.080 --> 0:17:49.560
<v Speaker 2>locked the field into a system where newbies apprenticed themselves

0:17:49.600 --> 0:17:53.120
<v Speaker 2>to established physicians and the practice of bitemark analysis became

0:17:53.160 --> 0:17:55.760
<v Speaker 2>a thing of wisdom handed down rather than a thing

0:17:55.840 --> 0:17:58.640
<v Speaker 2>of empirical study. And part of the problem here, part

0:17:58.640 --> 0:18:01.399
<v Speaker 2>of what makes this an emposts for science to develop

0:18:01.400 --> 0:18:05.080
<v Speaker 2>out of this. Right, it is possible in certain cases

0:18:05.480 --> 0:18:07.840
<v Speaker 2>to match teeth to a bite mark. I'm not going

0:18:07.920 --> 0:18:09.400
<v Speaker 2>to say that's a thing that you could never do,

0:18:10.160 --> 0:18:12.400
<v Speaker 2>but the number of cases in which you could actually

0:18:12.440 --> 0:18:16.000
<v Speaker 2>do that responsibly is a tiny, tiny fraction of the

0:18:16.040 --> 0:18:19.320
<v Speaker 2>number of cases that involve a bite. There's no incentive

0:18:19.480 --> 0:18:22.679
<v Speaker 2>financially to be honest about that, to say this is

0:18:22.680 --> 0:18:25.919
<v Speaker 2>not a good candidate for bitemark analysis. If your job

0:18:26.280 --> 0:18:30.600
<v Speaker 2>is selling bitemark analysis, right, right, the thing like your

0:18:30.760 --> 0:18:34.080
<v Speaker 2>financial interest is in saying every case, oh yeah, I

0:18:34.080 --> 0:18:36.000
<v Speaker 2>can tell you some good stuff about that bitemark.

0:18:36.200 --> 0:18:39.919
<v Speaker 3>Right. It's not like these people I imagine, you know,

0:18:40.400 --> 0:18:43.320
<v Speaker 3>like there are expert witnesses in different fields of science,

0:18:43.680 --> 0:18:45.680
<v Speaker 3>and there are people who come from other places and

0:18:45.680 --> 0:18:48.440
<v Speaker 3>they get paid for it, and you could argue about that,

0:18:48.520 --> 0:18:51.080
<v Speaker 3>but they're coming from places where they already have like

0:18:51.320 --> 0:18:55.080
<v Speaker 3>jobs doing other things. They work at a university where

0:18:55.119 --> 0:18:57.679
<v Speaker 3>they are like a professor and they do research, and

0:18:57.720 --> 0:18:59.679
<v Speaker 3>then or there are a doctor in a case and

0:18:59.760 --> 0:19:02.160
<v Speaker 3>then they have their own practice and then they're asked

0:19:02.160 --> 0:19:06.560
<v Speaker 3>to do this. If your field exists solely to be

0:19:06.640 --> 0:19:10.679
<v Speaker 3>an expert witness essentially, then that seems strange to me.

0:19:10.800 --> 0:19:13.040
<v Speaker 3>That does seem like a bit problematic. I mean, I

0:19:13.080 --> 0:19:17.760
<v Speaker 3>assume defence lawyers will use that argument, but I could

0:19:17.800 --> 0:19:19.080
<v Speaker 3>see that being questionable.

0:19:19.400 --> 0:19:21.080
<v Speaker 2>A lot of times they don't know to where they

0:19:21.119 --> 0:19:22.919
<v Speaker 2>don't feel like they can because you know, again in

0:19:22.960 --> 0:19:25.200
<v Speaker 2>their heads, like I'm just some lawyer. This is a doctor,

0:19:25.520 --> 0:19:29.280
<v Speaker 2>you know, it's a It causes problems. And again we

0:19:29.320 --> 0:19:32.760
<v Speaker 2>should note that like in any of these cases, forensic

0:19:32.840 --> 0:19:36.000
<v Speaker 2>evidence is not the only evidence. There's other stuff going

0:19:36.040 --> 0:19:38.800
<v Speaker 2>into it. But a lot of times forensic evidence is

0:19:38.840 --> 0:19:43.040
<v Speaker 2>what cinches these bad convictions. And this is like acknowledged

0:19:43.119 --> 0:19:46.360
<v Speaker 2>at the time by like the prosecutors and shit that like, yeah,

0:19:46.359 --> 0:19:48.680
<v Speaker 2>it was that bitemark analysis that got us this conviction.

0:19:49.000 --> 0:19:49.640
<v Speaker 3>Yeah.

0:19:49.680 --> 0:19:53.320
<v Speaker 2>So again, what you have with this kind of growing

0:19:53.359 --> 0:19:56.879
<v Speaker 2>field is you've got this board at the AFS that

0:19:56.920 --> 0:19:59.240
<v Speaker 2>are able to certify people as like these are the

0:19:59.320 --> 0:20:04.200
<v Speaker 2>real bite mine analysts. And this becomes like once you're

0:20:04.200 --> 0:20:06.840
<v Speaker 2>in that, the only way to become a bitemark analyst

0:20:06.960 --> 0:20:09.760
<v Speaker 2>is to get approval from these people who are already

0:20:09.960 --> 0:20:12.920
<v Speaker 2>very biased in such a way as to make this

0:20:12.960 --> 0:20:17.000
<v Speaker 2>be a profitable industry. And obviously, mentorship is a necessary

0:20:17.000 --> 0:20:20.159
<v Speaker 2>part of any medical field, any scientific discipline, really right,

0:20:20.200 --> 0:20:22.000
<v Speaker 2>And that's not a bad thing. It's not bad that,

0:20:22.160 --> 0:20:25.680
<v Speaker 2>you know, most doctors have mentors when they're younger doctors

0:20:25.680 --> 0:20:28.479
<v Speaker 2>with more experienced doctors. But what you get with these

0:20:28.520 --> 0:20:31.520
<v Speaker 2>forensic boards is more akin to a medieval guild than

0:20:31.560 --> 0:20:34.159
<v Speaker 2>anything we would associate with modern science. There is no

0:20:34.359 --> 0:20:37.840
<v Speaker 2>kind of opened peer review structure built into the field,

0:20:38.119 --> 0:20:40.320
<v Speaker 2>and the only people watching out to see if people

0:20:40.320 --> 0:20:43.080
<v Speaker 2>are practicing utter bunk are other people who have a

0:20:43.400 --> 0:20:46.600
<v Speaker 2>vested financial interest in maintaining the reputation of their field.

0:20:47.119 --> 0:20:49.640
<v Speaker 2>This becomes a problem when con men find their way

0:20:49.640 --> 0:20:52.639
<v Speaker 2>into practicing bitemark analysis, and that brings me to the

0:20:52.720 --> 0:20:57.280
<v Speaker 2>hideous story of Michael West, a dentist from Hattiesburg, Mississippi.

0:20:57.320 --> 0:21:00.320
<v Speaker 2>West decided to become a bitemark specialist when he realized

0:21:00.320 --> 0:21:02.840
<v Speaker 2>there was a potential fortune to be made in becoming

0:21:02.880 --> 0:21:06.480
<v Speaker 2>the Amazon dot Com bite forensics at the height.

0:21:07.000 --> 0:21:11.560
<v Speaker 3>Oh that's such as a terrible phrase. Terrible phrase. Oh

0:21:11.640 --> 0:21:13.280
<v Speaker 3>my god, cove it.

0:21:14.040 --> 0:21:16.320
<v Speaker 2>Do you know much about like conducting an autopsy and

0:21:16.359 --> 0:21:18.000
<v Speaker 2>how much time that takes and stuff.

0:21:19.400 --> 0:21:21.840
<v Speaker 3>I've worked on cadavers, but I've never actually been on

0:21:21.880 --> 0:21:25.119
<v Speaker 3>a true full autopsy. I assumed it's a very long time.

0:21:25.160 --> 0:21:26.640
<v Speaker 3>It's a long process, it's a lot to do.

0:21:27.440 --> 0:21:30.560
<v Speaker 2>It is pretty involved, and so it should have seemed

0:21:30.560 --> 0:21:32.320
<v Speaker 2>weird to people that at the height of his career

0:21:32.400 --> 0:21:35.879
<v Speaker 2>in the early nineties, West was conducting between twelve hundred

0:21:35.880 --> 0:21:40.040
<v Speaker 2>and eighteen hundred autopsies a year, And most experts will

0:21:40.080 --> 0:21:43.840
<v Speaker 2>agree is a lot for a dentist, super a dentist,

0:21:44.440 --> 0:21:47.879
<v Speaker 2>for a dentists, that is quite a few autopsies for

0:21:48.000 --> 0:21:48.640
<v Speaker 2>a dentist.

0:21:51.640 --> 0:21:54.119
<v Speaker 3>Wow, it sounded like a lot.

0:21:54.160 --> 0:21:56.040
<v Speaker 4>And then I remember, also dentist.

0:21:56.119 --> 0:21:58.240
<v Speaker 2>He's a dentist. Yeah, this is not a guy who

0:21:58.320 --> 0:22:01.000
<v Speaker 2>is like an expert of autopsy or.

0:22:01.480 --> 0:22:05.280
<v Speaker 3>Like, you know, not like a dentist in the doc

0:22:05.320 --> 0:22:08.119
<v Speaker 3>holiday old West, where that meant he can be like

0:22:08.160 --> 0:22:11.480
<v Speaker 3>a surgeon as well, like like a modern day Yeah.

0:22:11.520 --> 0:22:15.120
<v Speaker 2>Wow, now I know what you're saying here, Kava, Are

0:22:15.119 --> 0:22:18.240
<v Speaker 2>there even that many murder cases where somebody gets bitten?

0:22:18.520 --> 0:22:21.960
<v Speaker 2>And the answer is no. But West developed an ingenious

0:22:21.960 --> 0:22:24.760
<v Speaker 2>method for turning any run of the mill death into

0:22:24.800 --> 0:22:27.639
<v Speaker 2>a homicide with bitemarks that he could match to whatever

0:22:27.760 --> 0:22:30.639
<v Speaker 2>victim he was hired to look over. And I'm going

0:22:30.680 --> 0:22:34.040
<v Speaker 2>to quote from journalist Radley Balco, writing for Reason dot

0:22:34.040 --> 0:22:38.359
<v Speaker 2>Com describing this West's methods. Kava, you are about to

0:22:38.400 --> 0:22:42.360
<v Speaker 2>have a conniption fit here quote a fluorescent black light

0:22:42.440 --> 0:22:45.760
<v Speaker 2>flicks on. West is now employing a much ridiculed technique

0:22:45.800 --> 0:22:48.879
<v Speaker 2>he invented for identifying bite marks, which he modestly calls

0:22:48.920 --> 0:22:52.240
<v Speaker 2>the West phenomenon. He claims that by using a black

0:22:52.320 --> 0:22:55.960
<v Speaker 2>light and yellow goggles, he can find bitemarks, knife serrations,

0:22:55.960 --> 0:22:58.119
<v Speaker 2>and other tears and abrasions to the skin that no

0:22:58.240 --> 0:22:59.640
<v Speaker 2>other expert can see.

0:23:00.840 --> 0:23:02.840
<v Speaker 3>Okay, can we start by the fact that he calls

0:23:02.880 --> 0:23:05.680
<v Speaker 3>it the West phenomenon a douchebag?

0:23:06.480 --> 0:23:10.760
<v Speaker 2>Oh shit, Oh my god, that should get you flung

0:23:10.800 --> 0:23:11.840
<v Speaker 2>into the sea.

0:23:12.040 --> 0:23:15.639
<v Speaker 3>Oh my god, Like naming it after yourself with this

0:23:16.040 --> 0:23:18.600
<v Speaker 3>ridiculous like it has to be yellow goggles, Like he's

0:23:18.640 --> 0:23:21.879
<v Speaker 3>like studied UV lighting or some shit like that. What

0:23:22.080 --> 0:23:24.320
<v Speaker 3>a terrible I don't know. I don't need to know

0:23:24.359 --> 0:23:26.200
<v Speaker 3>any more about him. I don't like him.

0:23:26.440 --> 0:23:29.200
<v Speaker 2>Oh you're about to hear a lot more so. Once

0:23:29.400 --> 0:23:31.960
<v Speaker 2>he's found these bite marks, West can have a judge

0:23:31.960 --> 0:23:34.080
<v Speaker 2>compel whoever's been accused in the case and get a

0:23:34.119 --> 0:23:36.680
<v Speaker 2>cast made of their teeth. Right then, he simply takes

0:23:36.680 --> 0:23:40.080
<v Speaker 2>the cast and he uses it to put bite marks

0:23:40.160 --> 0:23:43.960
<v Speaker 2>on the dead body, thus creating the evidence that he

0:23:44.119 --> 0:23:47.680
<v Speaker 2>was hired to find. There are video tapes of him

0:23:47.720 --> 0:23:51.080
<v Speaker 2>doing this during an autopsy West conducted on a twenty

0:23:51.119 --> 0:23:55.400
<v Speaker 2>three month old baby named Haley olive O. Quote West's

0:23:55.400 --> 0:23:58.240
<v Speaker 2>hand then enters the frame holding a plastered dental mold

0:23:58.240 --> 0:24:00.920
<v Speaker 2>taken earlier that day from Jimmy Dunn, who was accused

0:24:00.960 --> 0:24:04.040
<v Speaker 2>of killing this kid. Using the replica of Duncan's teeth

0:24:04.040 --> 0:24:06.879
<v Speaker 2>as a weapon, West repeatedly presses and jams the front

0:24:06.920 --> 0:24:10.960
<v Speaker 2>bite plate directly into Olivo's cheek. Over two minutes, he

0:24:11.040 --> 0:24:14.560
<v Speaker 2>does this seventeen times. At six fifty seven, he starts

0:24:14.640 --> 0:24:18.119
<v Speaker 2>dragging Duncan's mold across olive O's face, beginning near her lips,

0:24:18.119 --> 0:24:20.879
<v Speaker 2>then scraping the plaster teeth down her face to her jaw.

0:24:21.240 --> 0:24:24.280
<v Speaker 2>He does this for another minute. Wes's next moves to

0:24:24.320 --> 0:24:27.480
<v Speaker 2>Olivo's elbow and uses the cast to impress Duncan's dentition

0:24:27.560 --> 0:24:30.520
<v Speaker 2>into an old Bruce hospital record show she suffered weeks

0:24:30.560 --> 0:24:33.720
<v Speaker 2>before her death. With the lights out, West continues to

0:24:33.800 --> 0:24:36.600
<v Speaker 2>jam the plaster cast into the girl's cheek, elbow, in arm.

0:24:36.680 --> 0:24:39.080
<v Speaker 2>Over the course of the twenty four minute video, West

0:24:39.119 --> 0:24:41.639
<v Speaker 2>pushes the cast of Duncan's teeth into the girl's body

0:24:41.640 --> 0:24:42.880
<v Speaker 2>at least fifty times.

0:24:43.680 --> 0:24:46.080
<v Speaker 1>I know I don't usually ask you to like skip

0:24:46.119 --> 0:24:48.000
<v Speaker 1>ahead for me, but can you blink twice? If it

0:24:48.119 --> 0:24:49.639
<v Speaker 1>ends badly for this motherfucker?

0:24:51.240 --> 0:24:56.359
<v Speaker 2>It definitely doesn't. So, I mean, it doesn't end well

0:24:56.400 --> 0:24:57.879
<v Speaker 2>for him, but it doesn't end the way.

0:24:57.760 --> 0:24:59.080
<v Speaker 3>It should issue him.

0:24:59.200 --> 0:25:01.680
<v Speaker 2>It's should being flung into the sea.

0:25:01.800 --> 0:25:06.359
<v Speaker 4>It should hoping for from from flumping.

0:25:07.200 --> 0:25:10.119
<v Speaker 3>It should aim, it should This is the story to

0:25:10.240 --> 0:25:13.359
<v Speaker 3>end with him tripping and falling into a bubbling cauldron

0:25:13.520 --> 0:25:14.400
<v Speaker 3>of herpes.

0:25:14.520 --> 0:25:15.480
<v Speaker 2>A cauldron would be.

0:25:15.480 --> 0:25:15.919
<v Speaker 3>Great, Yea.

0:25:16.080 --> 0:25:19.440
<v Speaker 1>The cauldron of herpes feels valid here, and that's kind

0:25:19.440 --> 0:25:21.240
<v Speaker 1>of the end I was hoping for.

0:25:21.720 --> 0:25:25.800
<v Speaker 4>Okay here, because I'm deeply disturbed.

0:25:25.840 --> 0:25:28.840
<v Speaker 3>Real quick though, I'm sorry, someone was recording him doing this,

0:25:28.880 --> 0:25:29.760
<v Speaker 3>like there's hitten.

0:25:29.880 --> 0:25:34.480
<v Speaker 2>This is an autopsy. They're they're like recorded, yeah, okay,

0:25:34.800 --> 0:25:37.840
<v Speaker 2>and this is so, this is like it's reviewed and

0:25:37.920 --> 0:25:40.120
<v Speaker 2>like this is part of what starts this guy kind

0:25:40.119 --> 0:25:42.439
<v Speaker 2>of being unwound as an expert. But in the in

0:25:42.480 --> 0:25:45.640
<v Speaker 2>this specific case, the footage that shows him creating bite

0:25:45.680 --> 0:25:48.800
<v Speaker 2>marks in the corpse was not entered into evidence, so

0:25:48.840 --> 0:25:51.119
<v Speaker 2>it had no role. In the initial trial of the

0:25:51.160 --> 0:25:54.800
<v Speaker 2>mine accused of murdering Hayley, his charge was raised to

0:25:54.920 --> 0:25:57.600
<v Speaker 2>capital murder, and the bite marks were cited as one

0:25:57.640 --> 0:26:00.720
<v Speaker 2>of the reasons why. But in the time between his exam,

0:26:00.760 --> 0:26:03.520
<v Speaker 2>between the exam West conducted and the actual trial over

0:26:03.760 --> 0:26:07.720
<v Speaker 2>this death, West was discredited due to reporting around his

0:26:07.800 --> 0:26:11.840
<v Speaker 2>deeply questionable methods, including this video. So the prosecution just

0:26:11.880 --> 0:26:15.800
<v Speaker 2>shopped around for another dentist. They tried Lowell Levine, but

0:26:15.880 --> 0:26:18.439
<v Speaker 2>he was familiar enough with west shady ass behavior to

0:26:18.440 --> 0:26:21.359
<v Speaker 2>turn them down. He's like, nah, man, I'm not that dumb,

0:26:21.520 --> 0:26:22.720
<v Speaker 2>Like absolutely not.

0:26:22.960 --> 0:26:25.360
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, maybe shady, but not that shady. Yeah.

0:26:25.680 --> 0:26:29.160
<v Speaker 2>Eventually they found a dental examiner who'd looked over photos

0:26:29.200 --> 0:26:31.920
<v Speaker 2>West had taken of the fraudulent exam he'd carried out

0:26:31.960 --> 0:26:35.399
<v Speaker 2>and confirmed that the defendant had left the bitemarks. Balco writes,

0:26:35.880 --> 0:26:39.280
<v Speaker 2>despite West's disintegrating reputation and the fact that the bitemark

0:26:39.320 --> 0:26:42.720
<v Speaker 2>evidence was derived from his work. Louisiana Fourth Judicial District

0:26:42.800 --> 0:26:45.600
<v Speaker 2>Judge Charles Joyner ruled in nineteen ninety five that the

0:26:45.680 --> 0:26:49.720
<v Speaker 2>video contained no exculpatory evidence favorable to the defendant, a

0:26:49.760 --> 0:26:53.040
<v Speaker 2>finding hotly disputed by all the forensic specialists consulted for

0:26:53.080 --> 0:26:56.080
<v Speaker 2>this article, and that therefore prosecutors didn't need to hand

0:26:56.119 --> 0:26:58.800
<v Speaker 2>it over. The state maintained at first that the defense

0:26:58.880 --> 0:27:01.440
<v Speaker 2>is somehow hoping to drag doctor West into this case

0:27:01.440 --> 0:27:04.080
<v Speaker 2>in order to create ancillary issues for the jury, but

0:27:04.119 --> 0:27:07.480
<v Speaker 2>by nineteen ninety six, prosecutors werelented and gave defense attorneys

0:27:07.480 --> 0:27:10.480
<v Speaker 2>the video, but Duncan's attorneys never showed the video to

0:27:10.520 --> 0:27:13.640
<v Speaker 2>their own dental examiner. This point would have become crucial,

0:27:13.720 --> 0:27:16.480
<v Speaker 2>since the bite marks were the only physical evidence used

0:27:16.520 --> 0:27:19.280
<v Speaker 2>to elevate Duncan from a negligent guardian to a lethal

0:27:19.400 --> 0:27:20.119
<v Speaker 2>child rapist.

0:27:20.520 --> 0:27:24.160
<v Speaker 3>I don't understand, though, Like okay, I have so many questions. One,

0:27:24.920 --> 0:27:27.399
<v Speaker 3>did this West guy not? I mean, why would he

0:27:27.800 --> 0:27:30.240
<v Speaker 3>do that knowing he was filming it? Did you think

0:27:30.240 --> 0:27:31.320
<v Speaker 3>no one was going to see it?

0:27:32.119 --> 0:27:36.120
<v Speaker 2>I think he thought he was explaining as he's doing

0:27:36.160 --> 0:27:38.320
<v Speaker 2>it basically like I'm testing, you know, this is where

0:27:38.359 --> 0:27:40.280
<v Speaker 2>I see the bite marks or whatever like.

0:27:41.119 --> 0:27:43.000
<v Speaker 3>But he's making the bite marks right.

0:27:43.160 --> 0:27:43.480
<v Speaker 5>Yeah.

0:27:43.800 --> 0:27:46.280
<v Speaker 2>I think he thought nobody, nobody was gonna really care

0:27:46.440 --> 0:27:48.600
<v Speaker 2>to check, and they didn't for a while.

0:27:48.640 --> 0:27:48.920
<v Speaker 3>Oh.

0:27:48.960 --> 0:27:54.000
<v Speaker 1>People that are like that level of bold feel untouchable.

0:27:54.160 --> 0:27:56.320
<v Speaker 1>And I think he thought he could just get away

0:27:56.400 --> 0:27:58.720
<v Speaker 1>with doing this, and it sounds like he did.

0:27:59.560 --> 0:27:59.960
<v Speaker 3>Yeah.

0:28:00.320 --> 0:28:03.359
<v Speaker 2>West and the other dental examiner. There's another guy in

0:28:03.400 --> 0:28:05.679
<v Speaker 2>the room with him there during that autopsy guy.

0:28:06.160 --> 0:28:07.800
<v Speaker 4>An examiner guy too.

0:28:08.320 --> 0:28:08.800
<v Speaker 3>Yeah.

0:28:08.960 --> 0:28:12.520
<v Speaker 2>They fall out of favor because journalists like Balco start

0:28:12.520 --> 0:28:16.199
<v Speaker 2>writing about their methods. But West continued to testify as

0:28:16.240 --> 0:28:20.520
<v Speaker 2>an expert until two thousand and one. What stops him

0:28:20.520 --> 0:28:22.960
<v Speaker 2>being cited as it brought in an expert in court

0:28:23.040 --> 0:28:25.320
<v Speaker 2>cases is that in two thousand and one, a defense

0:28:25.440 --> 0:28:28.439
<v Speaker 2>lawyer decided to test him by sending him a cast

0:28:28.560 --> 0:28:31.720
<v Speaker 2>of an active defendants teeth and photos of bitemarks from

0:28:31.720 --> 0:28:36.199
<v Speaker 2>a closed solved homicide case. West confirmed that the dental

0:28:36.600 --> 0:28:41.240
<v Speaker 2>mold matched the photos of the bite marks, so you know,

0:28:42.600 --> 0:28:45.960
<v Speaker 2>basically there's an active case going on. The defense lawyer

0:28:46.000 --> 0:28:48.280
<v Speaker 2>sends him a cast of the defendant in that case

0:28:48.360 --> 0:28:51.480
<v Speaker 2>Keith Teeth, and then photos of bitemarks from a completely

0:28:51.520 --> 0:28:54.760
<v Speaker 2>different homicide that has already been solved, and West is like, oh, yeah,

0:28:54.800 --> 0:29:00.400
<v Speaker 2>this guy made those bite marks, and like, yeah, I.

0:29:00.400 --> 0:29:03.360
<v Speaker 3>Mean, why would you believe that the defense lawyer is

0:29:03.360 --> 0:29:05.440
<v Speaker 3>trying to make you look dumb and you just help them.

0:29:05.560 --> 0:29:08.520
<v Speaker 3>It doesn't make this person seems it's insane to me

0:29:08.600 --> 0:29:10.040
<v Speaker 3>that this person was able to do this.

0:29:10.560 --> 0:29:10.720
<v Speaker 6>Well.

0:29:10.720 --> 0:29:12.040
<v Speaker 3>They also it's really incompetent.

0:29:12.640 --> 0:29:14.920
<v Speaker 2>What's really insane is how little the fact that he's

0:29:14.960 --> 0:29:17.520
<v Speaker 2>obviously a fraud helps the people that he had helped

0:29:17.520 --> 0:29:20.080
<v Speaker 2>to get convicted. In two thousand and three, the Mississippi

0:29:20.120 --> 0:29:22.800
<v Speaker 2>Supreme Court held that quote just because doctor West has

0:29:22.840 --> 0:29:25.720
<v Speaker 2>been wrong a lot does not mean without something more

0:29:25.840 --> 0:29:28.280
<v Speaker 2>that he was wrong here in a trial for another

0:29:28.320 --> 0:29:31.240
<v Speaker 2>man he'd helped to convict in Brock.

0:29:31.480 --> 0:29:34.400
<v Speaker 3>It's right twice today. So is doctor West.

0:29:34.560 --> 0:29:37.400
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and Jimmy Duncan, the guy convicted in the case

0:29:37.440 --> 0:29:41.760
<v Speaker 2>where he's fucking dragging a bite a toothcast across a

0:29:41.760 --> 0:29:45.000
<v Speaker 2>dead baby, still on death row as of twenty twenty three,

0:29:45.040 --> 0:29:47.640
<v Speaker 2>And it's one of those things where like, again, there's

0:29:47.840 --> 0:29:51.040
<v Speaker 2>other evidence a lot of the time, but in Duncan's case,

0:29:51.080 --> 0:29:55.120
<v Speaker 2>the only physical evidence was from West right, Like, it's.

0:29:55.800 --> 0:29:58.560
<v Speaker 3>So, how has that not been how? I mean, maybe

0:29:59.040 --> 0:30:01.800
<v Speaker 3>this is ongoing, but like they don't how come the

0:30:01.840 --> 0:30:03.880
<v Speaker 3>Innocent Project isn't working with him on that?

0:30:04.000 --> 0:30:05.440
<v Speaker 2>They are?

0:30:05.520 --> 0:30:05.880
<v Speaker 3>They are.

0:30:05.960 --> 0:30:08.880
<v Speaker 2>It's just like this, the fact that, like something seems

0:30:09.000 --> 0:30:11.320
<v Speaker 2>clearly fucked up number one, doesn't mean that you're going

0:30:11.360 --> 0:30:15.640
<v Speaker 2>to get court rulings that revisit you know, those cases

0:30:15.720 --> 0:30:18.360
<v Speaker 2>like it's it's just not it's a pain. It takes

0:30:18.720 --> 0:30:20.160
<v Speaker 2>a lot of a lot of these a lot of

0:30:20.160 --> 0:30:23.600
<v Speaker 2>people who are exonerated as a result of the projects worked.

0:30:23.600 --> 0:30:25.560
<v Speaker 2>It can take years or decades, you know.

0:30:25.600 --> 0:30:28.880
<v Speaker 3>Right, and he might have done the case though no

0:30:28.920 --> 0:30:31.680
<v Speaker 3>other knowledge, but like you know, with with what evans,

0:30:31.720 --> 0:30:34.480
<v Speaker 3>you know, if that's the only evidence, then it's highly suspect.

0:30:34.800 --> 0:30:36.600
<v Speaker 2>And and you know, certainly there are a lot of

0:30:36.640 --> 0:30:41.440
<v Speaker 2>cases where he matches a bite to a perp who

0:30:41.480 --> 0:30:44.360
<v Speaker 2>did do the murder. But that also doesn't like he

0:30:44.400 --> 0:30:47.600
<v Speaker 2>could still be lying. There's just other evidence, right, Like,

0:30:47.920 --> 0:30:49.719
<v Speaker 2>you know, the cops got the right guy and they

0:30:49.760 --> 0:30:51.880
<v Speaker 2>brought him in and he just agreed with you know

0:30:51.960 --> 0:30:53.920
<v Speaker 2>what the cops already thought. And in that case, he

0:30:54.000 --> 0:30:57.240
<v Speaker 2>was right because that guy happened to do it. But yeah,

0:30:57.360 --> 0:30:59.880
<v Speaker 2>it gives you an idea, just like how fucking sketchy.

0:31:00.200 --> 0:31:02.920
<v Speaker 2>A lot of this is now. One thing we should

0:31:02.920 --> 0:31:05.880
<v Speaker 2>all know at this point about scientific disinformation is that

0:31:05.960 --> 0:31:11.040
<v Speaker 2>if left unchecked, it spreads inevitably. Just like the sponsors

0:31:11.080 --> 0:31:14.480
<v Speaker 2>to our podcast who are always spreading out there in

0:31:14.520 --> 0:31:15.320
<v Speaker 2>the world.

0:31:15.320 --> 0:31:19.680
<v Speaker 3>Always fantasticizing getting out there like in cancer.

0:31:21.040 --> 0:31:22.240
<v Speaker 2>That's why we love them.

0:31:22.440 --> 0:31:30.760
<v Speaker 3>For your money, we're back.

0:31:31.560 --> 0:31:37.680
<v Speaker 2>So the fact that scientific disinformation spreads if left unchecked

0:31:37.720 --> 0:31:40.080
<v Speaker 2>is why you have to fight vigorously against people who

0:31:40.160 --> 0:31:42.840
<v Speaker 2>want to deny basic facts of reality for their own profit.

0:31:43.320 --> 0:31:46.680
<v Speaker 2>If you ignore, say an anti vaxed doctor claiming vaccines

0:31:46.760 --> 0:31:49.240
<v Speaker 2>cause autism to make a fortune for himself, in a

0:31:49.280 --> 0:31:52.840
<v Speaker 2>few years you might have presidential candidates screaming about vaccine

0:31:52.880 --> 0:31:54.920
<v Speaker 2>chips orf i e. Remectin in schools full of kids

0:31:54.960 --> 0:31:58.080
<v Speaker 2>with whooping cough. The field of forensic science has the

0:31:58.080 --> 0:31:58.760
<v Speaker 2>same issue.

0:31:59.240 --> 0:32:01.880
<v Speaker 3>I would even go even further than that and say,

0:32:01.920 --> 0:32:04.200
<v Speaker 3>you don't even know. It could be something even more subtle,

0:32:04.640 --> 0:32:07.800
<v Speaker 3>like some doctor who says, or I'm sorry, not doctor,

0:32:07.800 --> 0:32:11.880
<v Speaker 3>but some you know, famous actress says putting a jade

0:32:11.920 --> 0:32:15.840
<v Speaker 3>egg in your huha helps with such and such there

0:32:15.920 --> 0:32:19.800
<v Speaker 3>is Now I feel there's a direct line to that

0:32:19.800 --> 0:32:22.959
<v Speaker 3>that anti VAXX president. You know now I used to

0:32:22.960 --> 0:32:25.640
<v Speaker 3>not care that much. Now I do. Any bit of

0:32:25.680 --> 0:32:29.680
<v Speaker 3>this misinformation can lead eventually to this cascade. Eventually you

0:32:29.760 --> 0:32:33.800
<v Speaker 3>get RFK Junior like killing sim own babies. You know,

0:32:33.920 --> 0:32:35.480
<v Speaker 3>this is how it happens.

0:32:35.480 --> 0:32:39.920
<v Speaker 2>That the derangement, Like, yeah, it meant it's a kind,

0:32:40.000 --> 0:32:42.440
<v Speaker 2>it's a kind of cancer. It acts that way at least.

0:32:43.520 --> 0:32:45.480
<v Speaker 2>And for an example of just how bad it can get,

0:32:45.640 --> 0:32:48.720
<v Speaker 2>I want to turn now to the story of doctor R.

0:32:48.800 --> 0:32:53.040
<v Speaker 2>Pod vas Now on paper, Kava R. Pod Voss is

0:32:53.080 --> 0:32:56.400
<v Speaker 2>as legit as it gets. This guy's got a PhD

0:32:56.680 --> 0:33:01.320
<v Speaker 2>in forensic anthropology. He works with the University of Tennessee's

0:33:01.320 --> 0:33:04.840
<v Speaker 2>world famous body farm. He even has a Ted talk,

0:33:04.960 --> 0:33:08.160
<v Speaker 2>and most of that Ted talk sounds pretty reasonable to me,

0:33:08.720 --> 0:33:13.320
<v Speaker 2>notably not a scientist, but it sounds good. It's a

0:33:13.400 --> 0:33:17.000
<v Speaker 2>lucid look at how human decomposition is impacted by various

0:33:17.040 --> 0:33:21.280
<v Speaker 2>factors and how cadabra dogs often labradors, work by smelling

0:33:21.320 --> 0:33:24.520
<v Speaker 2>different chemicals that are a product of said decomposition, and

0:33:24.560 --> 0:33:27.520
<v Speaker 2>then about seventy percent of the way through his ted talk,

0:33:27.880 --> 0:33:28.480
<v Speaker 2>we get this.

0:33:29.120 --> 0:33:36.000
<v Speaker 6>Our next step is to develop our own Labrador and

0:33:36.080 --> 0:33:39.120
<v Speaker 6>the electronic version. We may not be good at a lot

0:33:39.160 --> 0:33:45.840
<v Speaker 6>of things, but we can nail those acronyms. Okay. This

0:33:46.120 --> 0:33:51.080
<v Speaker 6>instrument was designed specifically for two purposes, one to track

0:33:51.200 --> 0:33:54.960
<v Speaker 6>the chemical plume and the second to give the operator

0:33:55.360 --> 0:34:00.200
<v Speaker 6>an idea of which area has the highest concentration is

0:34:00.240 --> 0:34:02.520
<v Speaker 6>where the body is is where the concentration will be

0:34:02.560 --> 0:34:05.880
<v Speaker 6>the highest, and there's the plume MiG weights that moves away.

0:34:06.560 --> 0:34:10.640
<v Speaker 2>So what he is selling here, and the reason he

0:34:10.640 --> 0:34:13.600
<v Speaker 2>brings up an acronym is that his device that is

0:34:13.600 --> 0:34:17.480
<v Speaker 2>basically a mechanical corpse sniffing dog, is called the Labrador,

0:34:18.040 --> 0:34:20.960
<v Speaker 2>and the Labrador in this case is an acronym for

0:34:21.080 --> 0:34:25.200
<v Speaker 2>lightweight analyzer for buried remains in decomposition, odor recognition, And

0:34:25.239 --> 0:34:28.480
<v Speaker 2>to be honest, that's a pretty good acronym.

0:34:28.760 --> 0:34:30.200
<v Speaker 3>Like he did a.

0:34:30.160 --> 0:34:30.839
<v Speaker 2>Salad art.

0:34:33.800 --> 0:34:34.799
<v Speaker 3>And they came up with something.

0:34:34.840 --> 0:34:37.719
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, they made it happen. The device looks like a

0:34:37.760 --> 0:34:40.200
<v Speaker 2>bulky metal detector. It looks like a metal detector with

0:34:40.239 --> 0:34:42.280
<v Speaker 2>extra shit glute on it. Right, if you were again,

0:34:42.680 --> 0:34:44.759
<v Speaker 2>say you were doing a Star Trek episode and you

0:34:44.800 --> 0:34:47.640
<v Speaker 2>needed a future metal detector. You'd get a metal detector

0:34:47.680 --> 0:34:49.479
<v Speaker 2>and you'd throw some shit on it. You know, That's

0:34:49.600 --> 0:34:54.000
<v Speaker 2>how this thing looks. It's yeah, anyway, his device is

0:34:55.160 --> 0:34:57.880
<v Speaker 2>this is bullshit, right, But it makes sense that something

0:34:57.920 --> 0:35:00.480
<v Speaker 2>like this might work. Right if a dog can sniff

0:35:00.480 --> 0:35:03.319
<v Speaker 2>out of buried cadaver, and dogs can definitely do that,

0:35:04.000 --> 0:35:06.480
<v Speaker 2>we should be able to somedate design a device that

0:35:06.560 --> 0:35:09.319
<v Speaker 2>can fulfill the same role electronically. You know that that

0:35:09.440 --> 0:35:13.280
<v Speaker 2>makes sense, and perhaps someday we will. But doctor Voss's

0:35:13.320 --> 0:35:17.160
<v Speaker 2>gizmo does not use anything that we would call regular science. Instead,

0:35:17.440 --> 0:35:20.799
<v Speaker 2>it functions on the principle of a divining rod. Do

0:35:20.840 --> 0:35:23.680
<v Speaker 2>you know anything about divining rods or dowsing, kave.

0:35:23.800 --> 0:35:26.479
<v Speaker 3>We're talking about the old old school, like dust bowls,

0:35:27.680 --> 0:35:33.840
<v Speaker 3>wash fucking are Yeah, that's great, that's fucking great.

0:35:34.320 --> 0:35:37.200
<v Speaker 2>If you haven't been pilled on this particular bit of esoterica.

0:35:37.320 --> 0:35:40.000
<v Speaker 2>Dowsing or divining rods go back a long time, at

0:35:40.080 --> 0:35:43.120
<v Speaker 2>least about five hundred years, and variations of the practice

0:35:43.239 --> 0:35:45.759
<v Speaker 2>probably predate that. The basic idea is that you get

0:35:45.800 --> 0:35:48.160
<v Speaker 2>either a Y shaped piece of wood or two curved

0:35:48.160 --> 0:35:50.840
<v Speaker 2>copper rods, or you know, there's a couple other variants

0:35:50.840 --> 0:35:53.440
<v Speaker 2>of this, and you walk around looking for water or

0:35:53.440 --> 0:35:56.160
<v Speaker 2>whatever underground, and when the two rods cross or the

0:35:56.280 --> 0:35:58.520
<v Speaker 2>y shape stick gets pulled down, that means that it's

0:35:58.560 --> 0:36:01.879
<v Speaker 2>right below you. Right when the rod or rods move

0:36:01.960 --> 0:36:04.959
<v Speaker 2>or whatever, that's a sign that you're standing above whatever

0:36:04.960 --> 0:36:07.200
<v Speaker 2>you're looking for. And dowsers have claimed over the years

0:36:07.200 --> 0:36:11.080
<v Speaker 2>they can find everything from underwater underground water to buried

0:36:11.160 --> 0:36:14.719
<v Speaker 2>treasure to corpses. And this is done in a couple

0:36:14.760 --> 0:36:16.359
<v Speaker 2>of different ways. I'm not going to labor on all

0:36:16.360 --> 0:36:19.279
<v Speaker 2>of the different ways. It is generally considered officially to

0:36:19.360 --> 0:36:22.359
<v Speaker 2>be a pseudoscience because repeated studies have not been able

0:36:22.400 --> 0:36:25.080
<v Speaker 2>to show that dowsing is any more accurate than random chance.

0:36:25.239 --> 0:36:27.600
<v Speaker 3>It seems I could be easy to prove that, yeah. Yes.

0:36:27.880 --> 0:36:30.880
<v Speaker 2>The explanation for why the sticks cross or get pulled

0:36:30.960 --> 0:36:33.279
<v Speaker 2>or whatever is something called the idio motor effect, and

0:36:33.280 --> 0:36:37.520
<v Speaker 2>this is when suggestions, beliefs, or expectations cause unconscious muscular movements.

0:36:37.719 --> 0:36:40.759
<v Speaker 2>Most people are probably broadly familiar with the concept what's

0:36:40.760 --> 0:36:42.880
<v Speaker 2>happening here is not wildly different from what happens with

0:36:42.960 --> 0:36:46.799
<v Speaker 2>cops and drug sniffing dogs right. While dowsing has its

0:36:46.880 --> 0:36:49.920
<v Speaker 2>origins primarily in finding water, which is why it's also

0:36:50.000 --> 0:36:52.520
<v Speaker 2>often called water witching. Doctor Voss is one of a

0:36:52.600 --> 0:36:54.400
<v Speaker 2>number of people who think it can and should be

0:36:54.480 --> 0:36:57.719
<v Speaker 2>used to find human remains. He always frames this as

0:36:57.760 --> 0:37:00.600
<v Speaker 2>focused on both giving the families closure in the case

0:37:00.600 --> 0:37:03.240
<v Speaker 2>of hikers who died somewhere off trail and their bodies

0:37:03.280 --> 0:37:06.520
<v Speaker 2>are never found, and of course aiding in murder investigations.

0:37:06.960 --> 0:37:09.000
<v Speaker 2>And before we get into this grift, and it is

0:37:09.040 --> 0:37:11.239
<v Speaker 2>a grift, I want to cite one paragraph from an

0:37:11.320 --> 0:37:15.160
<v Speaker 2>article on doctor Voss in Mother Jones. In June twenty

0:37:15.200 --> 0:37:18.560
<v Speaker 2>twenty one, scientists from the FBI Laboratory, George Mason University,

0:37:18.560 --> 0:37:21.840
<v Speaker 2>and the US Army Criminal Investigation Command conducted a controlled

0:37:21.880 --> 0:37:24.360
<v Speaker 2>blind test to evaluate the ability of dowsing rods to

0:37:24.400 --> 0:37:27.800
<v Speaker 2>detect buried bones. A control group of participants was asked

0:37:27.840 --> 0:37:30.120
<v Speaker 2>to look at nine holes and to identify which ones

0:37:30.160 --> 0:37:32.959
<v Speaker 2>they thought contained bones. A different group did the same

0:37:33.000 --> 0:37:36.040
<v Speaker 2>thing using dowsing rods, which they didn't have experience using

0:37:36.080 --> 0:37:39.160
<v Speaker 2>for this purpose. According to the study, the scientists determined

0:37:39.200 --> 0:37:43.760
<v Speaker 2>that neither method worked. In an email exchange with Mother Jones,

0:37:43.840 --> 0:37:47.839
<v Speaker 2>doctor Voss called that study useless and in his opinion, wrong,

0:37:47.880 --> 0:37:50.839
<v Speaker 2>though it is matters because he gets to train a

0:37:50.920 --> 0:37:54.640
<v Speaker 2>lot of cops and forensic investigators. He wrote back in

0:37:54.680 --> 0:37:58.120
<v Speaker 2>his email that he teaches his students proper dowsing and

0:37:58.200 --> 0:38:02.239
<v Speaker 2>the seventeen scientific prints that quote make the rods work,

0:38:02.280 --> 0:38:04.600
<v Speaker 2>which took me years to find out.

0:38:05.080 --> 0:38:09.240
<v Speaker 3>Oh my god. Well, if your whole grift is based

0:38:09.239 --> 0:38:11.880
<v Speaker 3>on doing what a dog does but not as well,

0:38:12.400 --> 0:38:15.680
<v Speaker 3>like what a what a lame grift? Like we are

0:38:16.000 --> 0:38:18.799
<v Speaker 3>have dogs for that, Like, what's just.

0:38:21.320 --> 0:38:24.719
<v Speaker 2>What are the scientific seventeen of them? What are those

0:38:24.760 --> 0:38:26.120
<v Speaker 2>scientific principles?

0:38:26.680 --> 0:38:30.920
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, the fact that he's a Ted Talk and that

0:38:31.000 --> 0:38:32.960
<v Speaker 3>probably goes into that. I mean, it just goes to

0:38:32.960 --> 0:38:35.080
<v Speaker 3>show that, like you not everyone who gets a Ted

0:38:35.120 --> 0:38:38.839
<v Speaker 3>Talk is fucking really an expert on anything. I guess

0:38:38.880 --> 0:38:40.759
<v Speaker 3>you got. I mean that's a little disappointing. Actually, I

0:38:40.840 --> 0:38:43.759
<v Speaker 3>kind of assumed they'd have some level of like, you know,

0:38:43.880 --> 0:38:45.959
<v Speaker 3>criteria that has you have to give a Ted Talk.

0:38:46.719 --> 0:38:49.239
<v Speaker 2>You have to assume the Ted Talk booker person or

0:38:49.239 --> 0:38:52.440
<v Speaker 2>whatever isn't a forensic scientist. It would be weird if

0:38:52.480 --> 0:38:56.000
<v Speaker 2>they were and this guy is a forensic scientist with

0:38:56.040 --> 0:38:59.440
<v Speaker 2>impressive credentials who works, who treat trains FBI agents.

0:38:59.800 --> 0:39:02.520
<v Speaker 3>So what is he saying his again, it looks like

0:39:02.520 --> 0:39:04.400
<v Speaker 3>a metal detector with his extra shit.

0:39:04.640 --> 0:39:07.759
<v Speaker 2>To dows for corpses. He has them walk around with

0:39:07.840 --> 0:39:11.000
<v Speaker 2>copper rods where there are bodies buried so that they

0:39:11.000 --> 0:39:13.480
<v Speaker 2>can find them.

0:39:13.600 --> 0:39:17.920
<v Speaker 3>I mean, okay, I bite, what is the I want

0:39:18.000 --> 0:39:20.240
<v Speaker 3>to know, like, what is it about the dead body?

0:39:20.640 --> 0:39:23.760
<v Speaker 3>What pheromone? Because you know what is true? Like for example,

0:39:24.200 --> 0:39:27.080
<v Speaker 3>like there are researchers off the coast the pharallon islands

0:39:27.080 --> 0:39:30.600
<v Speaker 3>here in San Francisco who study orcas when they attack sharks,

0:39:30.800 --> 0:39:33.279
<v Speaker 3>and when a shark's body dies, it releases they think

0:39:33.360 --> 0:39:36.640
<v Speaker 3>a certain pheromone that acts as a warning sign to

0:39:36.719 --> 0:39:39.960
<v Speaker 3>other sharks to keep them away. So there is pheromones

0:39:40.000 --> 0:39:42.520
<v Speaker 3>that have been theorized to be released after death. Is

0:39:42.520 --> 0:39:44.920
<v Speaker 3>that what he's saying is that the body's releasing certain

0:39:44.960 --> 0:39:47.839
<v Speaker 3>odors or hormones that this device is picking up.

0:39:48.200 --> 0:39:51.839
<v Speaker 2>Bodies do release certain like odors that you couldn't Again,

0:39:51.880 --> 0:39:54.439
<v Speaker 2>that's what like a cadaver dog is smelling, right, even

0:39:54.440 --> 0:39:56.759
<v Speaker 2>if you can't like physically smell out, even smell a

0:39:56.800 --> 0:39:58.080
<v Speaker 2>dead body. He's right in front of you. If it's

0:39:58.120 --> 0:40:02.239
<v Speaker 2>like buried or something, dogs can find them sometimes.

0:40:02.400 --> 0:40:03.120
<v Speaker 3>Right.

0:40:03.360 --> 0:40:05.920
<v Speaker 2>What he's doing is he's out on the body farm

0:40:06.000 --> 0:40:08.080
<v Speaker 2>where they take dead bodies and they put them in

0:40:08.160 --> 0:40:11.160
<v Speaker 2>various situations to see how decomposition works and also to

0:40:11.200 --> 0:40:14.719
<v Speaker 2>train like investigators and stuff. And so he's walking around

0:40:14.800 --> 0:40:17.799
<v Speaker 2>places where he and others no bodies are buried, and

0:40:17.840 --> 0:40:20.880
<v Speaker 2>they are dowsing and eventually finding them. And what's really

0:40:20.920 --> 0:40:24.040
<v Speaker 2>probably happening is a mix of they know there's a

0:40:24.080 --> 0:40:27.720
<v Speaker 2>body somewhere, there's obvious signs that a body was buried,

0:40:27.800 --> 0:40:30.160
<v Speaker 2>and the ideo motor effect takes care of the rest. Right,

0:40:30.200 --> 0:40:33.000
<v Speaker 2>That's what I think is actually happening here. But what

0:40:33.080 --> 0:40:36.120
<v Speaker 2>he is telling people is that you can dowse for corpses.

0:40:36.320 --> 0:40:39.880
<v Speaker 2>And you can't. You just can't. It's not real science.

0:40:40.680 --> 0:40:43.160
<v Speaker 2>But again, if it was real science, he wouldn't say

0:40:43.280 --> 0:40:46.000
<v Speaker 2>I spent years figuring it out. He would say, here

0:40:46.080 --> 0:40:50.640
<v Speaker 2>is all of my pure reviewed research showing why this works. Right,

0:40:51.239 --> 0:40:54.400
<v Speaker 2>there would be a body of this would who people

0:40:54.400 --> 0:40:56.960
<v Speaker 2>would dedicate their lives if you could walk around with

0:40:57.040 --> 0:40:59.960
<v Speaker 2>copper rods and they would somehow point out dead body

0:41:00.080 --> 0:41:03.440
<v Speaker 2>he's underground. Someone would dedicate their life to figuring out

0:41:03.520 --> 0:41:06.160
<v Speaker 2>why that would be interesting.

0:41:06.680 --> 0:41:09.040
<v Speaker 3>Yes, people would be doing it all the time, by

0:41:09.080 --> 0:41:11.640
<v Speaker 3>the way, because people go on beaches looking for like

0:41:11.719 --> 0:41:14.040
<v Speaker 3>loose change. Imagine how much loose change people do go

0:41:14.120 --> 0:41:15.080
<v Speaker 3>dowsing a lot.

0:41:17.080 --> 0:41:20.800
<v Speaker 2>So again, there's not data like to prove that this works,

0:41:20.800 --> 0:41:23.200
<v Speaker 2>but it doesn't matter because Voss is an instructor at

0:41:23.200 --> 0:41:26.759
<v Speaker 2>the National Forensic Laboratory in Oakridge, Tennessee. Here's how that

0:41:26.840 --> 0:41:30.400
<v Speaker 2>Mother Jones reporter attended his class where he's teaching police officers,

0:41:30.520 --> 0:41:33.160
<v Speaker 2>and here's how he described it. There are no official

0:41:33.200 --> 0:41:35.759
<v Speaker 2>dowsing rods at hand, but that doesn't matter. You can

0:41:35.880 --> 0:41:38.560
<v Speaker 2>use the flags Voss offers, bend them like you would

0:41:38.600 --> 0:41:41.960
<v Speaker 2>coat hangers. Fred Ponds, a private detective from Miami with

0:41:42.000 --> 0:41:44.440
<v Speaker 2>a dark mustache and beard, gets right to it. He

0:41:44.520 --> 0:41:47.480
<v Speaker 2>tears the red plastic rectangles off two stakes and spaces

0:41:47.520 --> 0:41:49.920
<v Speaker 2>his hands to measure about twelve inches of straight steel,

0:41:50.160 --> 0:41:53.200
<v Speaker 2>then bends the remaining metal into handles, holding the stakes

0:41:53.320 --> 0:41:55.680
<v Speaker 2>like six shooters. He walks over one of the suspected

0:41:55.719 --> 0:41:58.680
<v Speaker 2>grave sites, the stakes cross. He does it again. They

0:41:58.719 --> 0:42:02.040
<v Speaker 2>cross and again they cross. I'm not kidding, Ponce says,

0:42:02.040 --> 0:42:05.120
<v Speaker 2>marveling that his di y gravefinder seems to be working.

0:42:05.680 --> 0:42:08.920
<v Speaker 2>And again, reasonably we would go like, well, you're at

0:42:08.920 --> 0:42:12.000
<v Speaker 2>a body farm. You know, they buried bodies around here.

0:42:12.480 --> 0:42:15.640
<v Speaker 2>Most people who bury corpses probably aren't good at like

0:42:15.760 --> 0:42:20.120
<v Speaker 2>hiding all of the evidence and the fact that the

0:42:20.160 --> 0:42:22.640
<v Speaker 2>fact that you're trying to convince me this is real science,

0:42:22.640 --> 0:42:24.960
<v Speaker 2>and you could say, literally, any metal you bend works

0:42:25.040 --> 0:42:27.640
<v Speaker 2>for this, what else works that way?

0:42:27.440 --> 0:42:31.120
<v Speaker 3>I don't expect I don't okay, I don't expect that much,

0:42:31.200 --> 0:42:36.840
<v Speaker 3>but like we're expecting like an eighteenth century technology to

0:42:37.200 --> 0:42:41.240
<v Speaker 3>help us, yeah, yeah, whatever, to help us find these

0:42:41.719 --> 0:42:45.200
<v Speaker 3>these corpses. I feel like we've gone wrong. I feel

0:42:45.200 --> 0:42:48.840
<v Speaker 3>like we've done We've like law enforcement's gone astray.

0:42:49.440 --> 0:42:52.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it might be fair to say that at this point,

0:42:54.080 --> 0:42:57.480
<v Speaker 2>reasonable people, and only reasonable people listen to this podcast

0:42:57.600 --> 0:43:01.440
<v Speaker 2>might say that sounds like nonsense. But doctor Voss's class

0:43:01.520 --> 0:43:03.680
<v Speaker 2>is among the most loved portions of the ten week

0:43:03.719 --> 0:43:07.719
<v Speaker 2>training course at the National Forensic Academy. It costs students,

0:43:07.080 --> 0:43:11.640
<v Speaker 2>mostly crime scene investigators from agencies in forty nine US states,

0:43:11.920 --> 0:43:15.760
<v Speaker 2>twelve thousand dollars of your tax dollars, so that's cool.

0:43:16.160 --> 0:43:19.640
<v Speaker 2>The academy itself is widely respected. The Washington Post called

0:43:19.640 --> 0:43:23.359
<v Speaker 2>it the Harvard of Hellish Violence. Voss's techniques are used

0:43:23.400 --> 0:43:26.239
<v Speaker 2>all over the country by real law enforcement officers in

0:43:26.239 --> 0:43:29.520
<v Speaker 2>spite of the fact that a lot of this is

0:43:29.680 --> 0:43:32.960
<v Speaker 2>just obviously bullshit. And for evidence of that, I'd like

0:43:33.000 --> 0:43:35.799
<v Speaker 2>to turn back to the Labrador, which we opened this

0:43:35.880 --> 0:43:39.839
<v Speaker 2>portion of the episode, discussing that July fifth, twenty twelve.

0:43:39.920 --> 0:43:42.360
<v Speaker 2>TED Talk is not one of the more more popular

0:43:42.400 --> 0:43:44.840
<v Speaker 2>TED talks. It's got like fourteen thousand views at present,

0:43:45.200 --> 0:43:47.239
<v Speaker 2>but the fact that Vos got a TED Talk might

0:43:47.239 --> 0:43:50.560
<v Speaker 2>suggest to some people that his Labrador was a real product.

0:43:50.880 --> 0:43:52.960
<v Speaker 2>As far as I can tell, it is not. The

0:43:53.000 --> 0:43:56.359
<v Speaker 2>device never launched commercially. When asked about this, Doctor Voss

0:43:56.360 --> 0:43:59.200
<v Speaker 2>always claims he has a patent on the device, as

0:43:59.239 --> 0:44:03.040
<v Speaker 2>if that matters. Mother Jones cites Diane France, director of

0:44:03.040 --> 0:44:07.560
<v Speaker 2>the Colorado Human Identification Laboratory. She notes, you can patent anything.

0:44:07.719 --> 0:44:10.160
<v Speaker 2>It doesn't mean that it works, It just means the

0:44:10.200 --> 0:44:13.800
<v Speaker 2>design has to be different from other products. Diane noted

0:44:13.840 --> 0:44:16.600
<v Speaker 2>that she's never seen the Labrador, let alone been able

0:44:16.680 --> 0:44:20.560
<v Speaker 2>to test it. Mother Jones could only find one expert

0:44:20.600 --> 0:44:23.760
<v Speaker 2>who claimed to have used the device, and that expert

0:44:23.800 --> 0:44:27.760
<v Speaker 2>was Michael Hadzel, president of the nonprofit Peace River Canine

0:44:27.800 --> 0:44:31.799
<v Speaker 2>Search and Rescue Association from Inglewood, Florida. He claims to

0:44:31.880 --> 0:44:34.040
<v Speaker 2>be field testing the device and that it has a

0:44:34.160 --> 0:44:37.800
<v Speaker 2>sixty percent success rate, but did not provide any data

0:44:37.920 --> 0:44:39.960
<v Speaker 2>on this whatsoever. And I will note that a guy

0:44:40.040 --> 0:44:42.520
<v Speaker 2>testing a device without backup and saying it works sixty

0:44:42.560 --> 0:44:45.680
<v Speaker 2>percent of the time is remarkably close to saying it

0:44:45.719 --> 0:44:47.359
<v Speaker 2>works about as well as the flip of a coin.

0:44:47.880 --> 0:44:51.959
<v Speaker 3>Super super bullshit aeron no error rates study again, getting

0:44:52.000 --> 0:44:53.560
<v Speaker 3>back to that thing we talked about in the first

0:44:53.560 --> 0:44:56.960
<v Speaker 3>episode error rates study, this is like, this is exactly

0:44:57.000 --> 0:44:58.960
<v Speaker 3>the flip of a coin, and no one will ever

0:44:59.040 --> 0:45:01.400
<v Speaker 3>do a study on on this because it's nonsense and

0:45:01.440 --> 0:45:03.879
<v Speaker 3>there's only it's a device that doesn't exist.

0:45:04.120 --> 0:45:07.120
<v Speaker 2>Obviously, as we as I've noted repeatedly, there's a lot

0:45:07.120 --> 0:45:09.839
<v Speaker 2>of problems with the way that police use dogs forensically.

0:45:09.960 --> 0:45:12.239
<v Speaker 2>But we know that dogs can smell this stuff, and

0:45:12.280 --> 0:45:13.799
<v Speaker 2>part of how we not is we have studied their

0:45:13.840 --> 0:45:17.760
<v Speaker 2>noses extensively. Like we have, there's data on how sensitive

0:45:17.760 --> 0:45:23.480
<v Speaker 2>a dog's nosis. Because it's science, because people noticed dogs

0:45:23.520 --> 0:45:27.160
<v Speaker 2>seemed supernaturally good at something, and rather than just saying, well,

0:45:28.200 --> 0:45:31.440
<v Speaker 2>that's good enough for me, they figured out the underpinning

0:45:31.520 --> 0:45:34.919
<v Speaker 2>reasons why. Because that's that's how real science is done.

0:45:35.280 --> 0:45:36.000
<v Speaker 3>Yeah.

0:45:36.040 --> 0:45:39.560
<v Speaker 2>The patent application itself lists the device. Actually, this is

0:45:39.600 --> 0:45:42.480
<v Speaker 2>the application I think for a successor device to the Labrador,

0:45:42.560 --> 0:45:46.120
<v Speaker 2>that's the improvement on. It lists the this this corpse

0:45:46.160 --> 0:45:49.520
<v Speaker 2>sniffing gadget as having two L shaped antenna that allow

0:45:49.600 --> 0:45:54.440
<v Speaker 2>it to channel electromagnetic waves. In other words, he basically

0:45:54.440 --> 0:45:56.640
<v Speaker 2>built a divining rod in the form factor of a

0:45:56.680 --> 0:45:57.440
<v Speaker 2>metal detector.

0:45:58.120 --> 0:46:02.480
<v Speaker 3>I've updated. I'm now call fairse you're gonna device.

0:46:04.960 --> 0:46:07.400
<v Speaker 2>I found an analysis. One of the best write ups

0:46:07.440 --> 0:46:09.680
<v Speaker 2>of this guy as a con man comes from the

0:46:09.680 --> 0:46:14.040
<v Speaker 2>website PCT missing dot org. The PCT is the Pacific

0:46:14.080 --> 0:46:16.320
<v Speaker 2>Crest Trail, right, this is it's the same. The Appalation

0:46:16.440 --> 0:46:18.000
<v Speaker 2>Trail is kind of the other one in the US.

0:46:18.080 --> 0:46:20.799
<v Speaker 2>You've got these two massive, long, continent wide trails that

0:46:20.920 --> 0:46:23.439
<v Speaker 2>like for a lot of people, it's their whole life

0:46:23.440 --> 0:46:26.080
<v Speaker 2>ambition to do the PCT, or to do the the

0:46:26.080 --> 0:46:28.440
<v Speaker 2>the Appellation, or to do both of them, right, And

0:46:28.600 --> 0:46:33.680
<v Speaker 2>because I don't know, parts of it seem appealing to me,

0:46:33.719 --> 0:46:35.239
<v Speaker 2>and then I think that's how tired i'd get.

0:46:35.320 --> 0:46:37.919
<v Speaker 3>Oh my god, no, God, bless them. I'm so glad

0:46:37.920 --> 0:46:38.640
<v Speaker 3>somebody wants to do that.

0:46:38.719 --> 0:46:42.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's very impressive. Obviously it can be dangerous, right,

0:46:42.680 --> 0:46:45.800
<v Speaker 2>people die doing this with some regularity, not the obviously,

0:46:45.880 --> 0:46:48.080
<v Speaker 2>not most people who do it. But it's not uncommon

0:46:48.120 --> 0:46:51.160
<v Speaker 2>for people to go missing. And so there's this website,

0:46:51.200 --> 0:46:54.000
<v Speaker 2>pct missing dot org that that both covers these missing

0:46:54.040 --> 0:46:56.960
<v Speaker 2>report person's cases, and what they're doing here is kind

0:46:57.000 --> 0:47:00.319
<v Speaker 2>of as journalists trying to advocate to families that are

0:47:00.360 --> 0:47:04.800
<v Speaker 2>being preyed upon by doctor Voss. Quote. The full patent

0:47:04.880 --> 0:47:08.360
<v Speaker 2>makes more references to divining rods, and during the Casey

0:47:08.400 --> 0:47:12.080
<v Speaker 2>Anthony trial in twenty eleven, doctor Voss admitted to dowsing

0:47:12.120 --> 0:47:16.960
<v Speaker 2>for graves as a hobby. Now, when I read that,

0:47:17.239 --> 0:47:21.080
<v Speaker 2>I said, what the fuck? And I clicked the hyperlink

0:47:21.800 --> 0:47:25.439
<v Speaker 2>on the words Casey Anthony trial, and that hyperlink took

0:47:25.480 --> 0:47:29.759
<v Speaker 2>me to a Casey Anthony trial. Fancam YouTube account that

0:47:29.840 --> 0:47:33.800
<v Speaker 2>includes cut up videos of doctor Voss's testimony during the

0:47:33.880 --> 0:47:37.480
<v Speaker 2>Casey Anthony trial. Where he was employed by the prosecution

0:47:37.880 --> 0:47:40.360
<v Speaker 2>as an expert witness when they were trying to prove

0:47:40.480 --> 0:47:43.279
<v Speaker 2>that that Toddler's dead body had at one point been

0:47:43.320 --> 0:47:46.520
<v Speaker 2>in the trunk of Anthony's car. So the prosecutors want

0:47:46.600 --> 0:47:49.560
<v Speaker 2>Voss to show that because he could find chemical evidence

0:47:49.560 --> 0:47:52.080
<v Speaker 2>of like the chemicals released by a decomposing body, that

0:47:52.160 --> 0:47:55.359
<v Speaker 2>the dead kid had been in Anthony's trunk. Right, That's

0:47:55.400 --> 0:47:56.239
<v Speaker 2>why they have him on.

0:47:56.360 --> 0:47:56.520
<v Speaker 3>Right.

0:47:56.960 --> 0:48:00.000
<v Speaker 2>Here's how Mother Jones describes Voss's performance in the Case

0:48:00.239 --> 0:48:03.279
<v Speaker 2>Anthony trial. Voss claimed that an air sample from the

0:48:03.320 --> 0:48:06.680
<v Speaker 2>trunk revealed high levels of compounds consistent with human decomposition

0:48:06.840 --> 0:48:10.640
<v Speaker 2>based on his research. An analytical chemist from Florida International

0:48:10.719 --> 0:48:14.880
<v Speaker 2>University testified that Voss's testimony wasn't backed up by scientific evidence,

0:48:15.040 --> 0:48:17.560
<v Speaker 2>and that many of the compounds Voss identified could have

0:48:17.560 --> 0:48:20.200
<v Speaker 2>been omitted by food wrappers and other trash recovered from

0:48:20.200 --> 0:48:23.760
<v Speaker 2>Anthony's trunk. Anthony was acquitted in part because of doubts

0:48:23.800 --> 0:48:26.359
<v Speaker 2>about the air sample from the car. Legal experts set

0:48:26.400 --> 0:48:29.279
<v Speaker 2>at the time. Now that's all fucked up and bio.

0:48:29.360 --> 0:48:31.000
<v Speaker 2>Before you get into it, I don't know anything about

0:48:31.000 --> 0:48:33.280
<v Speaker 2>the Casey Anthony trial. If you have a strong opinion

0:48:33.320 --> 0:48:35.360
<v Speaker 2>about that. I'm not making an opinion on the verdict

0:48:35.360 --> 0:48:37.799
<v Speaker 2>of that trial. What I am having an opinion on

0:48:38.160 --> 0:48:41.960
<v Speaker 2>is doctor Voss's testimony during that trial, because even being.

0:48:41.840 --> 0:48:43.959
<v Speaker 3>A part of it, why is this guy a part

0:48:44.000 --> 0:48:44.319
<v Speaker 3>of it?

0:48:45.480 --> 0:48:48.440
<v Speaker 2>I should not be in a fucking court room unless

0:48:48.440 --> 0:48:50.520
<v Speaker 2>he's being charged as a con man.

0:48:50.800 --> 0:48:52.920
<v Speaker 3>No matter how dumb you think things are, it's just

0:48:52.920 --> 0:48:56.440
<v Speaker 3>like they get dumber, Like are their children running the courts?

0:48:56.719 --> 0:48:58.759
<v Speaker 3>Why is this happening? Why is he even a part

0:48:58.800 --> 0:48:59.080
<v Speaker 3>of it?

0:49:00.080 --> 0:49:03.160
<v Speaker 2>He's got again, he has really good paper qualifications, but

0:49:03.200 --> 0:49:06.440
<v Speaker 2>when he actually gets on the stand, it's so fucking funny.

0:49:06.440 --> 0:49:08.200
<v Speaker 2>And I'm actually gonna play you a bit from this

0:49:08.360 --> 0:49:11.239
<v Speaker 2>video collage of his testimony during the trial.

0:49:12.080 --> 0:49:16.359
<v Speaker 6>At vas r P A. D v Ass. I think

0:49:16.400 --> 0:49:19.920
<v Speaker 6>I can make in a logical non logical, but I

0:49:19.920 --> 0:49:24.720
<v Speaker 6>can make a conclusion. You know, it's just another corroboration

0:49:25.160 --> 0:49:27.480
<v Speaker 6>of what my nose tells me is correct.

0:49:28.080 --> 0:49:31.760
<v Speaker 5>Did you do any other instrumental examinations of the carpet

0:49:31.880 --> 0:49:34.879
<v Speaker 5>piece that you significant ones?

0:49:35.560 --> 0:49:37.440
<v Speaker 6>I don't think I would call any. We don't know

0:49:37.480 --> 0:49:39.960
<v Speaker 6>where the source is. It could have been from decomposition

0:49:40.160 --> 0:49:41.760
<v Speaker 6>or it could have been from gasoline.

0:49:42.200 --> 0:49:49.720
<v Speaker 5>Is they're a specific, established chemical odor signature for human decomposition,

0:49:52.080 --> 0:49:55.440
<v Speaker 5>A clear and specific one to human decomposition only.

0:49:56.200 --> 0:49:56.799
<v Speaker 3>I do not think.

0:49:56.840 --> 0:50:02.719
<v Speaker 7>So you are not a chemist, correct, You're not an

0:50:02.760 --> 0:50:07.240
<v Speaker 7>analytical chemist. Correct, you're not a biochemist.

0:50:07.840 --> 0:50:12.480
<v Speaker 8>Correct, And therefore you really can't testify as to the

0:50:12.600 --> 0:50:17.360
<v Speaker 8>chemistry and the makeup of things of which you have

0:50:17.480 --> 0:50:18.080
<v Speaker 8>no experience.

0:50:18.239 --> 0:50:23.960
<v Speaker 6>Correct, well, if I've never looked at something, Yeah, I

0:50:24.040 --> 0:50:25.920
<v Speaker 6>suppose that's true to certain examines.

0:50:28.680 --> 0:50:30.880
<v Speaker 7>But you do not list what you got your PhD in?

0:50:31.000 --> 0:50:32.719
<v Speaker 7>Could you tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury

0:50:32.800 --> 0:50:34.920
<v Speaker 7>what you got your PhD in anthropology?

0:50:35.040 --> 0:50:37.040
<v Speaker 6>Now that was the hearings.

0:50:41.840 --> 0:50:44.359
<v Speaker 3>Now, look anthropology.

0:50:44.360 --> 0:50:46.160
<v Speaker 2>Is it's so funny.

0:50:46.200 --> 0:50:47.480
<v Speaker 3>I like that.

0:50:47.480 --> 0:50:52.640
<v Speaker 2>That's such a good cross examination because like, look, there

0:50:52.640 --> 0:50:55.759
<v Speaker 2>are actually a lot of anthropologists in forensic science, right

0:50:55.800 --> 0:50:58.680
<v Speaker 2>that that there's a lot of things about anthropology. It's

0:50:58.680 --> 0:51:01.239
<v Speaker 2>a discipline that are relevant, especially when you're talking about

0:51:01.320 --> 0:51:03.360
<v Speaker 2>like digging up people who were murdered years ago and

0:51:03.400 --> 0:51:06.200
<v Speaker 2>buried and like all that. So obviously forensic scientists are useful.

0:51:06.440 --> 0:51:10.239
<v Speaker 2>What they are not is chemists. And if you are

0:51:10.320 --> 0:51:13.440
<v Speaker 2>as an anthropologist, claiming to have developed this like novel

0:51:13.520 --> 0:51:16.919
<v Speaker 2>technique of measuring chemicals that are specific to human decomposition.

0:51:17.440 --> 0:51:19.600
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to need to see that somebody who knows

0:51:19.680 --> 0:51:23.960
<v Speaker 2>chemistry professionally has been involved in that process.

0:51:23.239 --> 0:51:28.080
<v Speaker 3>Backed this up. Oh my god, it's so disheartening. The

0:51:28.120 --> 0:51:30.279
<v Speaker 3>thing about it that's kind of a bummer is that, like,

0:51:30.360 --> 0:51:32.160
<v Speaker 3>you know, I get it if you would come across

0:51:32.200 --> 0:51:35.359
<v Speaker 3>on the stand as being like really knowledgeable, authoritative, but

0:51:35.400 --> 0:51:37.560
<v Speaker 3>he doesn't even seem like that. He can't even like

0:51:37.640 --> 0:51:40.359
<v Speaker 3>fake it that well, like you know, gonna be a grifter,

0:51:40.480 --> 0:51:42.759
<v Speaker 3>you gotta he's not even good at it.

0:51:42.560 --> 0:51:44.800
<v Speaker 2>It's gotta be both that like a lot of cops

0:51:44.840 --> 0:51:47.800
<v Speaker 2>are just not all that bright, and also I assume

0:51:48.120 --> 0:51:50.879
<v Speaker 2>one to one he's charming enough that like he makes

0:51:50.880 --> 0:51:52.560
<v Speaker 2>you feel like he knows what he's talking about, But

0:51:52.600 --> 0:51:54.280
<v Speaker 2>he does not look good up on that stand.

0:51:54.400 --> 0:51:58.160
<v Speaker 3>No, he does not look It's a bad grift. I

0:51:58.160 --> 0:51:59.879
<v Speaker 3>don't know how it's worked at all for him.

0:52:00.200 --> 0:52:03.239
<v Speaker 2>I mean, you got it's remarkable, Jesus, Yeah, he sure did.

0:52:04.440 --> 0:52:07.520
<v Speaker 2>A consummate professional doctor Voss doesn't just make his money

0:52:07.520 --> 0:52:10.880
<v Speaker 2>teaching CSI guys and consulting badly on court cases. He

0:52:10.920 --> 0:52:13.640
<v Speaker 2>also reaches out to families who have lost loved ones.

0:52:13.880 --> 0:52:16.720
<v Speaker 2>Some of these people do speak highly of him. Dlana

0:52:16.800 --> 0:52:20.280
<v Speaker 2>Hall Bodmer's sister Gina, went missing in June of nineteen

0:52:20.360 --> 0:52:23.399
<v Speaker 2>eighty with a man named Stephen Epperley. Her body has

0:52:23.480 --> 0:52:26.680
<v Speaker 2>never been found, but Gina is sure doctor Voss located

0:52:26.680 --> 0:52:29.759
<v Speaker 2>it because his device signaled a frequency he matched to

0:52:29.800 --> 0:52:33.280
<v Speaker 2>her specific corpse in eight locations, which he claims means

0:52:33.320 --> 0:52:37.239
<v Speaker 2>she was dismembered and buried in eight different areas. Now,

0:52:37.280 --> 0:52:40.960
<v Speaker 2>Epperley had already been convicted in a rare nobody homicide.

0:52:41.000 --> 0:52:43.080
<v Speaker 2>I think he's actually one of the first nobody homicides

0:52:43.280 --> 0:52:46.719
<v Speaker 2>convictions in Florida. But you know, what they're looking for

0:52:46.760 --> 0:52:47.920
<v Speaker 2>is like where was she buried?

0:52:48.000 --> 0:52:48.160
<v Speaker 3>Right?

0:52:48.200 --> 0:52:49.880
<v Speaker 2>And he says like, well, I found evidence she was

0:52:49.880 --> 0:52:51.759
<v Speaker 2>cut up and buried in these parts, and they find

0:52:51.760 --> 0:52:55.440
<v Speaker 2>some bone fragments near where he picks out, And I

0:52:55.480 --> 0:52:58.279
<v Speaker 2>haven't found any confirmation that they were human. The last

0:52:58.400 --> 0:53:00.799
<v Speaker 2>article I read and said they were like still being analyzed,

0:53:00.880 --> 0:53:02.840
<v Speaker 2>but it seems like if they were, he would be

0:53:02.840 --> 0:53:05.520
<v Speaker 2>trumpeting that. So maybe again, if you spend a lot

0:53:05.520 --> 0:53:07.799
<v Speaker 2>of time in the woods, you run into a lot

0:53:07.800 --> 0:53:11.360
<v Speaker 2>of bones. Sure, right, and I've definitely seen bones are

0:53:11.400 --> 0:53:12.880
<v Speaker 2>I'm like, well, yeah, that could belong to It's just

0:53:12.920 --> 0:53:15.440
<v Speaker 2>a little shard of bone. I can't identify what it is.

0:53:15.480 --> 0:53:18.200
<v Speaker 2>I assume a doctor, a scientist of some sort could.

0:53:18.400 --> 0:53:22.000
<v Speaker 3>But is he reaching out to these people directly or

0:53:22.040 --> 0:53:23.040
<v Speaker 3>are they coming to him?

0:53:23.080 --> 0:53:25.319
<v Speaker 2>For I think it's a mix. But a lot of

0:53:25.360 --> 0:53:27.920
<v Speaker 2>times I do think he does reach out, especially if

0:53:27.960 --> 0:53:31.160
<v Speaker 2>it's like a big case. He's also you know, famous

0:53:31.239 --> 0:53:33.759
<v Speaker 2>enough that some people who are desperate to find their

0:53:33.800 --> 0:53:35.839
<v Speaker 2>lost loved ones, you know, go to him.

0:53:36.360 --> 0:53:38.839
<v Speaker 3>This is still happening. He's still doing this. This is something, Yes,

0:53:38.920 --> 0:53:39.719
<v Speaker 3>this is still going.

0:53:39.840 --> 0:53:42.719
<v Speaker 2>That's why that Pacific Crest Trail website is covering him,

0:53:42.719 --> 0:53:44.759
<v Speaker 2>because he's been sort of preying on people who have

0:53:44.800 --> 0:53:46.040
<v Speaker 2>lost loved ones on the trail.

0:53:46.480 --> 0:53:46.840
<v Speaker 3>Wow.

0:53:47.160 --> 0:53:50.240
<v Speaker 2>And again, I we just brought up this case. This woman, Lana,

0:53:50.239 --> 0:53:53.040
<v Speaker 2>whose sister was murdered in nineteen eighty. She's clearly someone

0:53:53.080 --> 0:53:55.840
<v Speaker 2>who is mourning a lost loved one and desperately hopes

0:53:55.960 --> 0:53:59.120
<v Speaker 2>to get some kind of closure using what she thinks

0:53:59.160 --> 0:54:03.920
<v Speaker 2>is science. Right, she also is looking to Again, this

0:54:04.040 --> 0:54:06.600
<v Speaker 2>is very sad. Part of why she's working with doctor

0:54:06.680 --> 0:54:10.319
<v Speaker 2>Voss is that he's kind of convinced her that they

0:54:10.480 --> 0:54:13.160
<v Speaker 2>by figuring out how to use this device and using

0:54:13.200 --> 0:54:15.760
<v Speaker 2>her sister's case as a case study, they could also

0:54:15.840 --> 0:54:19.000
<v Speaker 2>use this thing to find abducted children, right, And this

0:54:19.520 --> 0:54:22.480
<v Speaker 2>presents an opportunity to Delana where she thinks, like, maybe

0:54:22.480 --> 0:54:25.040
<v Speaker 2>I can make something good come out of my sister's death.

0:54:25.680 --> 0:54:30.000
<v Speaker 2>And I understand that impulse, right, But this is not science,

0:54:30.200 --> 0:54:32.800
<v Speaker 2>and it's not doctor Voss isn't going to help anybody

0:54:33.200 --> 0:54:36.359
<v Speaker 2>like she has been taken for a ride by him,

0:54:36.520 --> 0:54:38.680
<v Speaker 2>and I mean, I think there's pretty gross of him.

0:54:39.120 --> 0:54:43.520
<v Speaker 3>There's more realistic science behind the Ghostbusters proton packs than

0:54:43.560 --> 0:54:47.200
<v Speaker 3>there is this device that he has, and they also

0:54:47.239 --> 0:54:50.440
<v Speaker 3>look cooler and like this is and he's able to

0:54:50.800 --> 0:54:54.600
<v Speaker 3>sort of use this. It's just it's I mean, I'm

0:54:54.640 --> 0:54:57.200
<v Speaker 3>just it's amazing how much money you can make it

0:54:58.040 --> 0:55:00.520
<v Speaker 3>in this world with a grift. It's a amazing.

0:55:00.960 --> 0:55:04.600
<v Speaker 2>And what's even more amazing is doctor Voss's patented Find

0:55:04.640 --> 0:55:07.360
<v Speaker 2>Your Dead loved One service, the primary sponsor of this

0:55:07.440 --> 0:55:10.120
<v Speaker 2>episode of Behind the Bastards and Cava. When doctor Voss

0:55:10.160 --> 0:55:12.239
<v Speaker 2>came to me and said, I want to sponsor a

0:55:12.280 --> 0:55:17.240
<v Speaker 2>podcast episode on forensic science lies. I said, it seems

0:55:17.320 --> 0:55:19.440
<v Speaker 2>kind of weird because we're definitely going to tear you

0:55:19.480 --> 0:55:21.440
<v Speaker 2>a new one. But he paid us one hundred and

0:55:21.440 --> 0:55:24.360
<v Speaker 2>seventy thousand dollars, so here's amazing.

0:55:24.360 --> 0:55:31.440
<v Speaker 3>He's a swell guy.

0:55:33.200 --> 0:55:37.440
<v Speaker 2>Anyway, we're back, so again, I can't blame Gina for

0:55:37.600 --> 0:55:41.800
<v Speaker 2>like wanting to get something positive out of her sister's murder.

0:55:42.280 --> 0:55:44.880
<v Speaker 2>But I can blame doctor Voss for, in my opinion,

0:55:44.960 --> 0:55:47.400
<v Speaker 2>taking advantage of her and a lot of other grieving people.

0:55:47.840 --> 0:55:50.319
<v Speaker 2>Case in point, a shitload of folks who've lost loved

0:55:50.320 --> 0:55:53.799
<v Speaker 2>ones on the PCT, people like the family of David O'Sullivan,

0:55:53.920 --> 0:55:56.200
<v Speaker 2>a twenty five year old from Ireland who went missing

0:55:56.280 --> 0:55:59.640
<v Speaker 2>in the spring of twenty seventeen. Voss scanned for his

0:55:59.680 --> 0:56:03.920
<v Speaker 2>body from a helicopter with his labrador and gave GPS

0:56:04.000 --> 0:56:07.640
<v Speaker 2>coordinates to where rescuers would find the body. A mountaineer

0:56:07.719 --> 0:56:11.160
<v Speaker 2>went to the coordinates and found nothing. Oh Sullivan is

0:56:11.200 --> 0:56:14.000
<v Speaker 2>still missing three years later. Again, was still missing three

0:56:14.040 --> 0:56:14.520
<v Speaker 2>years later.

0:56:14.840 --> 0:56:17.680
<v Speaker 3>Again. If people out there listening trying to figure out

0:56:17.719 --> 0:56:19.960
<v Speaker 3>what this labrador thing is, it's just like a dumb

0:56:20.000 --> 0:56:24.240
<v Speaker 3>looking metal box nothing. It's a los of nothing. It's

0:56:24.280 --> 0:56:28.080
<v Speaker 3>nothing like how would that? How would from working from

0:56:28.120 --> 0:56:30.439
<v Speaker 3>like an inch away? I don't think it would work

0:56:30.680 --> 0:56:32.000
<v Speaker 3>much less from a helicopter.

0:56:32.320 --> 0:56:35.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, and yeah, I'm going to quote again from

0:56:35.000 --> 0:56:37.560
<v Speaker 2>mother Jones here, and this is them talking to the

0:56:37.560 --> 0:56:40.920
<v Speaker 2>family of David O'Sullivan. Voss cost us a lot of

0:56:40.960 --> 0:56:43.440
<v Speaker 2>money and gave us false hope, which was much worse.

0:56:43.560 --> 0:56:46.760
<v Speaker 2>The Lost Higer's mother, Carmelosa Lovin, wrote in an email,

0:56:46.840 --> 0:56:49.720
<v Speaker 2>adding that she now doubts Voss ever found a missing person.

0:56:50.239 --> 0:56:52.279
<v Speaker 2>Families are at their most vulnerable at this time, and

0:56:52.320 --> 0:56:56.640
<v Speaker 2>we'll try desperate measures. Voss is such a fixture in

0:56:56.719 --> 0:56:59.680
<v Speaker 2>the I Lost a loved one on the PCT community

0:56:59.719 --> 0:57:02.160
<v Speaker 2>that the first startup again this website has done it

0:57:02.200 --> 0:57:04.240
<v Speaker 2>right above him because they feel the need to warn

0:57:04.320 --> 0:57:07.280
<v Speaker 2>people in the community about him. Because he's a fucking predator,

0:57:07.920 --> 0:57:11.600
<v Speaker 2>is what some people might argue. He cites a patent file,

0:57:11.680 --> 0:57:14.080
<v Speaker 2>or the guy who wrote that article in PCT missing

0:57:14.120 --> 0:57:17.000
<v Speaker 2>dot Org sites a patent filing for this successor device

0:57:17.040 --> 0:57:19.600
<v Speaker 2>to the Labrador, which is called the inquisitor. And I'm

0:57:19.640 --> 0:57:21.800
<v Speaker 2>not really curious about what the acronym stands for But

0:57:21.840 --> 0:57:23.640
<v Speaker 2>I do want to read this quote from that PCT

0:57:23.840 --> 0:57:27.920
<v Speaker 2>Missing article. I've reviewed twenty seven cases Voss worked, and

0:57:27.960 --> 0:57:30.440
<v Speaker 2>I can't find a single one where the inquisitor detected

0:57:30.480 --> 0:57:33.320
<v Speaker 2>an actual missing person or their remains. I know of

0:57:33.400 --> 0:57:35.680
<v Speaker 2>one missing hiker case in which Voss and his device

0:57:35.720 --> 0:57:38.240
<v Speaker 2>walked within feet of the remains and totally missed it.

0:57:38.520 --> 0:57:40.560
<v Speaker 2>We know this because the missing person was found by

0:57:40.640 --> 0:57:44.040
<v Speaker 2>accident many months later, well outside the area detected by

0:57:44.120 --> 0:57:45.240
<v Speaker 2>Voss and his inquisitor.

0:57:47.920 --> 0:57:50.160
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I mean, I mean, you know, the thing is

0:57:50.160 --> 0:57:52.600
<v Speaker 3>that he does it once, you know, shame on him.

0:57:52.960 --> 0:57:55.880
<v Speaker 3>He makes a living off of it, Shame on us.

0:57:56.000 --> 0:57:59.600
<v Speaker 2>Right, there's a broader problem. This is a systemic issue.

0:57:59.600 --> 0:58:03.200
<v Speaker 2>Now that article of that PCT missing article, which again

0:58:03.720 --> 0:58:06.760
<v Speaker 2>I would not surprised that this is a community, right,

0:58:06.800 --> 0:58:08.800
<v Speaker 2>that there's enough missing people, and that it's enough of

0:58:08.800 --> 0:58:10.960
<v Speaker 2>a thing that folks who are particularly really into the

0:58:11.000 --> 0:58:14.320
<v Speaker 2>trail do. But I was impressed at like the degree

0:58:14.360 --> 0:58:17.400
<v Speaker 2>of rigor in the article that this guy put together

0:58:18.000 --> 0:58:21.400
<v Speaker 2>on doctor Voss. It's really quite good. The author of

0:58:21.400 --> 0:58:25.120
<v Speaker 2>that talk to doctor Monte Miller, director of Forensic DNA Experts,

0:58:25.440 --> 0:58:29.080
<v Speaker 2>to provide an analysis of the patent for the Inquisitor device.

0:58:29.520 --> 0:58:33.720
<v Speaker 2>Doctor Miller has a PhD in biochemistry, not anthropology, which

0:58:33.760 --> 0:58:38.240
<v Speaker 2>makes him somewhat more qualified to draw conclusions on biochemistry. Quote,

0:58:38.480 --> 0:58:41.240
<v Speaker 2>in a six page report, you thoroughly debunked the Inquisitor's

0:58:41.280 --> 0:58:44.840
<v Speaker 2>ability to locate dead family members using your fingernail clippings.

0:58:44.840 --> 0:58:48.600
<v Speaker 2>That's what Voss was advertising. You give me your fingernails,

0:58:48.640 --> 0:58:51.640
<v Speaker 2>and I will find your loved one using my magical gadget.

0:58:52.600 --> 0:58:55.440
<v Speaker 2>That's so right for an example of how ridiculous this is,

0:58:55.960 --> 0:59:00.240
<v Speaker 2>it's hard to get DNA from fingernail clippings, right Like,

0:59:00.680 --> 0:59:02.600
<v Speaker 2>it's not You could do it, but it's not easy,

0:59:02.680 --> 0:59:04.400
<v Speaker 2>right Like, it's one of the more difficult things in

0:59:04.480 --> 0:59:09.280
<v Speaker 2>DNA related science. You certainly cannot put your finger nail

0:59:09.400 --> 0:59:13.560
<v Speaker 2>clippings in a box that then finds your son's body.

0:59:14.040 --> 0:59:18.960
<v Speaker 3>That's just not real. Yeah, I don't like this guy.

0:59:19.280 --> 0:59:23.600
<v Speaker 3>I mean, whenever you tell me about these grifters that

0:59:23.640 --> 0:59:29.360
<v Speaker 3>are able to pull off these scams allegedly, I don't

0:59:29.360 --> 0:59:33.560
<v Speaker 3>know if he listens or if he's latigonist, but like it,

0:59:34.080 --> 0:59:36.160
<v Speaker 3>I have. It almost is a part of me. That's

0:59:36.240 --> 0:59:39.680
<v Speaker 3>just like, that's pretty I wish I had that confidence.

0:59:39.960 --> 0:59:42.160
<v Speaker 3>I wish I had this level of like confidence in

0:59:42.160 --> 0:59:47.000
<v Speaker 3>my skills to be like to try and sell something

0:59:47.120 --> 0:59:50.720
<v Speaker 3>like this, Like it's kind of inspiring in a weird way.

0:59:50.880 --> 0:59:52.840
<v Speaker 3>I hate to admit that it is.

0:59:53.440 --> 0:59:56.200
<v Speaker 2>It's awesome and like the literal sense of that word,

0:59:56.280 --> 0:59:59.600
<v Speaker 2>and that you have awe at the audacity of this motherfucker.

1:00:00.080 --> 1:00:04.000
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, it's working. He's like, he's like, yeah, he wouldn't

1:00:04.080 --> 1:00:05.200
<v Speaker 3>keep doing it.

1:00:05.280 --> 1:00:07.760
<v Speaker 2>He like it may not be working as well. Now

1:00:07.920 --> 1:00:10.080
<v Speaker 2>that's a little unclear to me. Sources at the UT

1:00:10.280 --> 1:00:13.760
<v Speaker 2>Forensic Anthropology Center say Voss is no longer associated with

1:00:13.800 --> 1:00:16.520
<v Speaker 2>their department. The author of that article I cited talk

1:00:16.600 --> 1:00:20.400
<v Speaker 2>to a PhD who specializes in light ar. This person

1:00:20.520 --> 1:00:24.440
<v Speaker 2>described Voss as predatory. To date, there are no scientific

1:00:24.440 --> 1:00:27.520
<v Speaker 2>studies backing at Boss's claims. A person who wrote that

1:00:27.600 --> 1:00:30.240
<v Speaker 2>article claims he charges three hundred dollars an hour, plus

1:00:30.320 --> 1:00:33.720
<v Speaker 2>expenses and a retainer for his services, which is deeply Again,

1:00:34.320 --> 1:00:36.760
<v Speaker 2>if you if your fucking kid is missing, you'll do

1:00:36.880 --> 1:00:42.520
<v Speaker 2>anything if you can be con Obviously, for his part,

1:00:42.600 --> 1:00:44.960
<v Speaker 2>Boss told Mother Jones he's not out to take advantage

1:00:44.960 --> 1:00:48.240
<v Speaker 2>of anybody, a statement made almost exclusively by people out

1:00:48.280 --> 1:00:50.960
<v Speaker 2>to take advantage of other people. He states that his

1:00:51.040 --> 1:00:53.960
<v Speaker 2>fee is minimal and that he's worked pro bono in

1:00:54.040 --> 1:00:57.040
<v Speaker 2>the past, a statement wonderfully vague enough that it means

1:00:57.080 --> 1:01:00.840
<v Speaker 2>almost nothing. He does note that he also operates with

1:01:00.920 --> 1:01:05.760
<v Speaker 2>more recognized tools like cadaver dogs and chemical tests. Curious then,

1:01:05.840 --> 1:01:08.080
<v Speaker 2>that he makes such a point about his patented body

1:01:08.080 --> 1:01:10.320
<v Speaker 2>stiffing machine that no one can seem to prove has

1:01:10.360 --> 1:01:14.240
<v Speaker 2>been studied in any kind of objective, repeatable way. Eric Bartling,

1:01:14.440 --> 1:01:17.640
<v Speaker 2>an anthropology professor who was former president of the American

1:01:17.640 --> 1:01:22.440
<v Speaker 2>Bord of Forensic Anthropology, says Voss's services are not scientifically valid.

1:01:22.720 --> 1:01:25.840
<v Speaker 2>Helen Gilking, director of the Forensic Anthropology Lab at the

1:01:25.880 --> 1:01:29.400
<v Speaker 2>University of North Texas Center for Human Identification, adds part

1:01:29.440 --> 1:01:31.640
<v Speaker 2>of the problem has to do that Voss doesn't belong

1:01:31.680 --> 1:01:35.080
<v Speaker 2>to any of the usual organizations or societies. He's operating

1:01:35.120 --> 1:01:37.480
<v Speaker 2>in a society of consumers who have been conditioned by

1:01:37.480 --> 1:01:40.560
<v Speaker 2>all sorts of forensic scientific fantasy in the popular media.

1:01:40.640 --> 1:01:43.080
<v Speaker 2>As a result, there is no shortage of potential victims.

1:01:43.880 --> 1:01:46.120
<v Speaker 2>I don't fully agree with her, because again, he is

1:01:46.160 --> 1:01:50.840
<v Speaker 2>associated with some reputable thing like organizations. He's been teaching

1:01:50.880 --> 1:01:54.840
<v Speaker 2>cops the fucking body farm. It's not weird that people

1:01:54.920 --> 1:01:57.720
<v Speaker 2>think he's got qualifications. Part of the issue is that

1:01:58.240 --> 1:02:01.760
<v Speaker 2>this is not just a vas thing. Like the whole

1:02:01.760 --> 1:02:05.280
<v Speaker 2>field of forensic science, all the different fields of forensic

1:02:05.320 --> 1:02:10.560
<v Speaker 2>science are riddled with like issues in adequately determining whether

1:02:10.720 --> 1:02:14.360
<v Speaker 2>or not different techniques are valid and repeatable science. This

1:02:14.480 --> 1:02:16.680
<v Speaker 2>is a problem again and again. We're not even going

1:02:16.760 --> 1:02:18.240
<v Speaker 2>to get into it in these episodes because there's so

1:02:18.280 --> 1:02:20.160
<v Speaker 2>much else, but like, one of the big findings in

1:02:20.160 --> 1:02:22.080
<v Speaker 2>the last couple of decades has been that a huge

1:02:22.120 --> 1:02:25.000
<v Speaker 2>amount of what used to be called like arson analysis

1:02:25.040 --> 1:02:28.840
<v Speaker 2>like burn analysis, was just wrong. People were convicted all

1:02:28.880 --> 1:02:31.520
<v Speaker 2>the fucking time based on an understanding of what sort

1:02:31.560 --> 1:02:34.800
<v Speaker 2>of patterns and a fire indicated arson that were not

1:02:35.640 --> 1:02:39.360
<v Speaker 2>necessarily indicators of arson that could happen in totally accidental

1:02:39.400 --> 1:02:41.480
<v Speaker 2>fires and fires that are started electrically. That they were

1:02:41.520 --> 1:02:44.800
<v Speaker 2>like this only happens when you pour fuel right was

1:02:44.840 --> 1:02:47.200
<v Speaker 2>completely bucked. People went to fucking prison for this shit.

1:02:47.440 --> 1:02:50.160
<v Speaker 2>It happened. It's all over the goddamn place, and it's

1:02:50.200 --> 1:02:54.600
<v Speaker 2>because once people have the idea to start doing this

1:02:54.640 --> 1:02:57.880
<v Speaker 2>as a method of forensic analysis. They just start doing

1:02:57.920 --> 1:03:01.200
<v Speaker 2>it in court for money, rather than building up a

1:03:01.360 --> 1:03:03.360
<v Speaker 2>body of science around it first.

1:03:03.720 --> 1:03:07.360
<v Speaker 3>You know, again, it comes out of like the legal

1:03:07.400 --> 1:03:10.360
<v Speaker 3>system and law enforcement, as opposed to coming out of

1:03:10.400 --> 1:03:14.720
<v Speaker 3>like the traditional sciences, where they come out of yeah yeah,

1:03:14.760 --> 1:03:15.840
<v Speaker 3>fundamental flaws.

1:03:16.560 --> 1:03:20.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah so. And while Voss is a particularly noteworthy example

1:03:20.640 --> 1:03:22.840
<v Speaker 2>of the problematic aspects of having little in the way

1:03:22.880 --> 1:03:26.200
<v Speaker 2>of objective standards for any kind of practitioners forensic science,

1:03:26.560 --> 1:03:29.800
<v Speaker 2>he's not nearly alone. This brings me to doctor Richard

1:03:29.920 --> 1:03:33.920
<v Speaker 2>Vorder Bruges, who has used as unparalleled skill and denim

1:03:33.960 --> 1:03:37.920
<v Speaker 2>identification to idea bank robber Wilburn mccreeth, who was sentenced

1:03:37.920 --> 1:03:42.400
<v Speaker 2>to prison for ninety two years. Now, what identification he's

1:03:42.440 --> 1:03:47.440
<v Speaker 2>matching like pants and shirts on camera, like the pattern

1:03:47.640 --> 1:03:50.520
<v Speaker 2>of creases and folds in them to prove that it's

1:03:50.560 --> 1:03:54.080
<v Speaker 2>the same shirt, not just like an identical because obviously

1:03:54.120 --> 1:03:56.480
<v Speaker 2>a lot of people buy the same versions of the

1:03:56.520 --> 1:03:58.160
<v Speaker 2>same shirt. You have to prove that, like this is

1:03:58.240 --> 1:04:02.040
<v Speaker 2>the this shirt on camera is the shirt this guy owns, right,

1:04:02.280 --> 1:04:05.640
<v Speaker 2>And he's doing that by like doing wrinkle analysis, which.

1:04:05.440 --> 1:04:07.520
<v Speaker 3>Is like wow, awesome.

1:04:08.240 --> 1:04:10.360
<v Speaker 2>It's one thing if there's a guy like rob Say

1:04:10.360 --> 1:04:11.880
<v Speaker 2>a guy holds up a liquor store and you see

1:04:11.920 --> 1:04:14.400
<v Speaker 2>he's wearing a certain shirt with a specific pattern, and

1:04:14.440 --> 1:04:17.200
<v Speaker 2>there's three cigarette burns in the shoulder, and you find

1:04:17.520 --> 1:04:19.959
<v Speaker 2>this a shirt with the same pattern and cigarette burns

1:04:19.960 --> 1:04:22.080
<v Speaker 2>in the same way. That's some evidence, right, that would

1:04:22.120 --> 1:04:25.720
<v Speaker 2>definitely be reasonable to introduce, right, Yeah, what he's doing

1:04:26.080 --> 1:04:29.520
<v Speaker 2>is much sketchier than this. Right, look at this. There's

1:04:29.520 --> 1:04:32.439
<v Speaker 2>a photograph of comparison for this bank robbery case where

1:04:32.440 --> 1:04:37.080
<v Speaker 2>you can see how kind of unclear the actual clips

1:04:37.120 --> 1:04:41.360
<v Speaker 2>from the bank camera are. And you can compare that

1:04:41.480 --> 1:04:45.080
<v Speaker 2>with like the pictures they have of the suspect and

1:04:45.120 --> 1:04:47.600
<v Speaker 2>his shirt, and it's just a bunch of like arrows

1:04:47.640 --> 1:04:50.720
<v Speaker 2>pointing at nothing, Like I can't even see what they're

1:04:50.760 --> 1:04:54.439
<v Speaker 2>claiming is like the unique wrinkle patterns that prove these

1:04:54.440 --> 1:04:55.280
<v Speaker 2>are the same.

1:04:56.280 --> 1:04:59.240
<v Speaker 3>So for listeners, what we have on the screen right

1:04:59.280 --> 1:05:03.080
<v Speaker 3>now is a bunch of pictures black and white, taking

1:05:03.120 --> 1:05:06.800
<v Speaker 3>from surveillance photos of like a plaid shirt. You can't

1:05:06.800 --> 1:05:10.560
<v Speaker 3>really tell the color. And there is like, just like

1:05:10.640 --> 1:05:14.040
<v Speaker 3>you Robert mentioned, a bunch of arrows literally pointing to

1:05:14.280 --> 1:05:17.520
<v Speaker 3>it could be anything, which just random. There's random arrows

1:05:17.560 --> 1:05:21.080
<v Speaker 3>sort of pointing here and there no discernible like arrangement

1:05:21.400 --> 1:05:24.040
<v Speaker 3>in the concept I'm guessing here is like like, for example,

1:05:24.080 --> 1:05:26.240
<v Speaker 3>my shirt right now, there's like these folds and wrinkles

1:05:26.280 --> 1:05:29.600
<v Speaker 3>around my armpit, for example, Like they would check that,

1:05:29.680 --> 1:05:31.600
<v Speaker 3>put an arrow there and be like this fold here

1:05:31.840 --> 1:05:37.720
<v Speaker 3>is very specific, which is like, which seems pretty unreproducible

1:05:37.720 --> 1:05:40.640
<v Speaker 3>to me. This, like I seems like an absolute garbage.

1:05:40.920 --> 1:05:43.360
<v Speaker 4>Every guy in Pittsburgh has this shirt.

1:05:44.040 --> 1:05:47.080
<v Speaker 2>It's one thing to say, you know, I've done open

1:05:47.120 --> 1:05:50.560
<v Speaker 2>source analysis that has been sighted in courts and stuff, right,

1:05:50.600 --> 1:05:52.720
<v Speaker 2>and like when you do it, it's stuff like, Okay, well,

1:05:52.720 --> 1:05:54.840
<v Speaker 2>this person is wearing a mask, but they have an

1:05:54.960 --> 1:05:57.560
<v Speaker 2>article of clothing, and there's another picture of a person

1:05:57.960 --> 1:06:00.919
<v Speaker 2>who is wearing the same mask, who has the same

1:06:01.000 --> 1:06:02.880
<v Speaker 2>article of clothing, and then a picture of them without

1:06:02.880 --> 1:06:05.120
<v Speaker 2>the mask wearing that clothing, and you can also see

1:06:05.120 --> 1:06:08.160
<v Speaker 2>evidence of like there's this part of a tattoo in

1:06:08.360 --> 1:06:10.360
<v Speaker 2>the picture of the person without the mask that is

1:06:10.400 --> 1:06:12.080
<v Speaker 2>present in the picture of the person with the mask,

1:06:12.120 --> 1:06:14.080
<v Speaker 2>and like you know these other you know, there's a

1:06:14.160 --> 1:06:15.800
<v Speaker 2>ring or something that you can see in all these

1:06:15.840 --> 1:06:17.760
<v Speaker 2>other pictures, and like we can sort of suggest that

1:06:17.800 --> 1:06:20.240
<v Speaker 2>this is the same person in all these pictures, because

1:06:20.320 --> 1:06:23.040
<v Speaker 2>these things are really consistent, right, and there's enough of

1:06:23.080 --> 1:06:26.360
<v Speaker 2>them that it would be really weird if like that.

1:06:26.400 --> 1:06:29.400
<v Speaker 2>It's very unlikely that it's like not the same person, right.

1:06:29.520 --> 1:06:32.560
<v Speaker 2>Whereas Bruce is just saying, he literally says, based on

1:06:32.600 --> 1:06:34.560
<v Speaker 2>the photos I just showed you, there is a one

1:06:34.600 --> 1:06:36.960
<v Speaker 2>in six hundred and fifty billion chance that these are

1:06:37.000 --> 1:06:37.720
<v Speaker 2>different shirts.

1:06:37.960 --> 1:06:41.120
<v Speaker 3>Oh my god, that's where does he get that number from?

1:06:41.320 --> 1:06:45.480
<v Speaker 3>Holy hell? What a what a bold statement.

1:06:45.560 --> 1:06:45.800
<v Speaker 1>Man.

1:06:45.840 --> 1:06:49.400
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to need to see your fucking math. I

1:06:49.400 --> 1:06:51.800
<v Speaker 2>don't even know math, but I'm going to need to

1:06:51.840 --> 1:06:56.640
<v Speaker 2>see you proof that. To me, it's a number calculation, bro.

1:06:57.640 --> 1:07:00.560
<v Speaker 2>Pro Publican notes quote there is no body of work,

1:07:00.600 --> 1:07:03.760
<v Speaker 2>at least not outside of the FBI on clothing pattern matching.

1:07:03.920 --> 1:07:06.560
<v Speaker 2>There's no data available to tailing the number of identical

1:07:06.600 --> 1:07:09.520
<v Speaker 2>shirts created during manufacturing runs, or how many variations an

1:07:09.560 --> 1:07:12.880
<v Speaker 2>examiner should expect to find then a lot of manufactured clothes,

1:07:13.040 --> 1:07:15.280
<v Speaker 2>Nor is there any specific training required to turn an

1:07:15.320 --> 1:07:18.080
<v Speaker 2>FBI examiner into an expert on clothing features. From what's

1:07:18.080 --> 1:07:20.840
<v Speaker 2>been obtained by Pro public La, the only requirement seems

1:07:20.840 --> 1:07:22.280
<v Speaker 2>to be a functioning pair of eyes.

1:07:23.400 --> 1:07:25.560
<v Speaker 4>Do they even say the brand of this shirt they're

1:07:25.600 --> 1:07:26.840
<v Speaker 4>using as an example.

1:07:26.560 --> 1:07:29.320
<v Speaker 2>Oh, I'm sure, Yeah, I'm sure they do somewhere. But

1:07:29.440 --> 1:07:30.120
<v Speaker 2>like two.

1:07:29.920 --> 1:07:32.800
<v Speaker 4>Thousand and four of the Gap, everybody had that shirt.

1:07:32.840 --> 1:07:34.120
<v Speaker 4>It's not a specialty shit.

1:07:34.200 --> 1:07:36.960
<v Speaker 2>It's like a red plaid shirt shirt.

1:07:37.080 --> 1:07:40.960
<v Speaker 4>It's a plaid collar shirt. This is not some specialty item.

1:07:41.200 --> 1:07:45.360
<v Speaker 3>Jesus Christ, my god. Now so desperate. We're so desperate.

1:07:45.400 --> 1:07:47.520
<v Speaker 3>This is how bad it is, how bad we are

1:07:47.560 --> 1:07:50.040
<v Speaker 3>at solving crimes as we are turning to stuff like this.

1:07:50.680 --> 1:07:54.320
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's amazing stuff. The FBI has claimed in court

1:07:54.360 --> 1:07:57.000
<v Speaker 2>filings that patterns of wrinkles and jeans and shirts are

1:07:57.040 --> 1:07:59.720
<v Speaker 2>as unique as fingerprints, which really gives up some of

1:07:59.760 --> 1:08:03.200
<v Speaker 2>the game here. Fingerprints are accepted as a flawless method

1:08:03.240 --> 1:08:06.680
<v Speaker 2>of scientific identification, though, as we started these episodes by saying,

1:08:06.720 --> 1:08:08.680
<v Speaker 2>they are not. So if you want to make your

1:08:08.760 --> 1:08:12.040
<v Speaker 2>much sketchier tactic look acceptable, you have to tell the

1:08:12.120 --> 1:08:16.280
<v Speaker 2>jury it's just as reliable as finger printing. Pro Publica continues,

1:08:16.840 --> 1:08:19.920
<v Speaker 2>Like anything else, this science is prone to confirmation bias,

1:08:20.000 --> 1:08:23.480
<v Speaker 2>but in these cases it's much worse. FBI image examiners

1:08:23.520 --> 1:08:26.479
<v Speaker 2>aren't given control images or items to guard against this.

1:08:26.760 --> 1:08:30.879
<v Speaker 2>They're only given images and the items investigators believe are evidence,

1:08:30.920 --> 1:08:34.439
<v Speaker 2>so it guides examiners to inevitable conclusions. The research tends

1:08:34.479 --> 1:08:37.639
<v Speaker 2>to be little more than finding ways images and items match,

1:08:37.880 --> 1:08:40.759
<v Speaker 2>working backwards from the assumption that the item being examined

1:08:40.760 --> 1:08:44.640
<v Speaker 2>as evidence of a criminal act. The entire body of

1:08:44.680 --> 1:08:48.799
<v Speaker 2>this quote unquote wrinkle matching science rests on a twenty

1:08:48.840 --> 1:08:51.559
<v Speaker 2>plus year old case involving a pair of blue gens.

1:08:52.040 --> 1:08:57.120
<v Speaker 2>Let me show you the photographic evidence. Can you even

1:08:57.160 --> 1:08:59.360
<v Speaker 2>see the fucking wrinkles in these pictures?

1:09:00.040 --> 1:09:04.080
<v Speaker 3>Okay? So we are looking at two side by side photos,

1:09:04.760 --> 1:09:07.719
<v Speaker 3>very old, grainy, black and white photos.

1:09:08.000 --> 1:09:11.519
<v Speaker 4>Yea's supposed to be the same pants? Yes, okay.

1:09:11.800 --> 1:09:14.559
<v Speaker 1>One is a straight leg geen that's like a stove

1:09:14.640 --> 1:09:18.240
<v Speaker 1>pipe style. The other one is like almost a wide

1:09:18.360 --> 1:09:20.080
<v Speaker 1>leg or a bootcut gen.

1:09:20.520 --> 1:09:23.160
<v Speaker 4>What what? And there are clearly different colors.

1:09:23.280 --> 1:09:25.320
<v Speaker 1>I can even tell they're different colors in black and white,

1:09:25.760 --> 1:09:31.120
<v Speaker 1>and the denim print is completely different, the stitching is different,

1:09:32.880 --> 1:09:35.200
<v Speaker 1>and uh.

1:09:34.400 --> 1:09:35.400
<v Speaker 4>This is all bullshit.

1:09:35.520 --> 1:09:39.160
<v Speaker 3>Sorry, I mean like I would. Okay, here's the thing.

1:09:39.280 --> 1:09:43.479
<v Speaker 3>If there was some computer analysis that like really honed

1:09:43.479 --> 1:09:46.479
<v Speaker 3>in on like a section of like the fiber, and

1:09:46.520 --> 1:09:48.479
<v Speaker 3>they said, oh, you could see there there's a problem

1:09:48.479 --> 1:09:50.559
<v Speaker 3>here with the stitch. Like the stitch here is a

1:09:50.640 --> 1:09:52.920
<v Speaker 3>unique mess up like this is like a one in

1:09:52.960 --> 1:09:56.240
<v Speaker 3>a whatever thousand chance of having a mess up like this.

1:09:56.640 --> 1:09:59.880
<v Speaker 3>Then that sort of makes sense. But literally, this seems

1:09:59.880 --> 1:10:02.000
<v Speaker 3>to be a science where it's like, look, the genes

1:10:02.000 --> 1:10:04.599
<v Speaker 3>are wrinkled here and here and here, and these genes

1:10:04.640 --> 1:10:07.320
<v Speaker 3>over here are also wrinkled in a similar sort of way.

1:10:07.880 --> 1:10:10.840
<v Speaker 3>They must be the same person. Like, you know how

1:10:10.880 --> 1:10:14.680
<v Speaker 3>pissed I would be if I got sentenced erroneously to

1:10:14.800 --> 1:10:17.360
<v Speaker 3>jail because of this, Like it would be even worse

1:10:17.479 --> 1:10:20.080
<v Speaker 3>than going to jail without doing the crime. It would

1:10:20.120 --> 1:10:22.439
<v Speaker 3>be because of this I went to jail. I'd be

1:10:22.520 --> 1:10:23.400
<v Speaker 3>so furious.

1:10:23.600 --> 1:10:28.599
<v Speaker 4>These are costly different genes. The styles are not the same.

1:10:28.720 --> 1:10:31.880
<v Speaker 1>You got street stove pipe and you've got wide leg

1:10:32.200 --> 1:10:32.760
<v Speaker 1>boot cut.

1:10:33.280 --> 1:10:36.240
<v Speaker 4>What the fuck are we even talking about here? This

1:10:36.360 --> 1:10:41.360
<v Speaker 4>is bullshit for a lot of genes. I know what

1:10:41.400 --> 1:10:42.360
<v Speaker 4>I'm talking about.

1:10:42.680 --> 1:10:45.240
<v Speaker 2>I will say the good thing is that the field

1:10:45.240 --> 1:10:48.840
<v Speaker 2>of wrinkle analysis is not as respected as it once was.

1:10:48.920 --> 1:10:52.120
<v Speaker 4>But really, really, because it's based off of this.

1:10:52.400 --> 1:10:56.479
<v Speaker 2>Okay, because the innocence projects for folks got a lot

1:10:56.560 --> 1:11:00.160
<v Speaker 2>of people's convictions over turned based on like really shoddy

1:11:00.200 --> 1:11:03.400
<v Speaker 2>this specifically being very shoddy science, and it's forced the

1:11:03.520 --> 1:11:07.920
<v Speaker 2>Justice Department to change their requirements around this. DOJ standards

1:11:07.960 --> 1:11:11.839
<v Speaker 2>now mandate that they're scientists and experts, not unequivocally claimed

1:11:11.880 --> 1:11:15.519
<v Speaker 2>that fingerprints or bullets or hair analysis can determine which

1:11:15.560 --> 1:11:17.759
<v Speaker 2>bullet fired a gun, or which hand left a print,

1:11:18.000 --> 1:11:20.480
<v Speaker 2>or which had grew a hair quote to the exclusion

1:11:20.560 --> 1:11:23.040
<v Speaker 2>of all others. This is the kind of claims that

1:11:23.040 --> 1:11:26.479
<v Speaker 2>we're making about stuff like bullet analysis, wrinkle matching that like,

1:11:26.800 --> 1:11:29.759
<v Speaker 2>because of my expertise, is like an FBI trained fucking

1:11:29.800 --> 1:11:32.400
<v Speaker 2>wrinkle I can these are the same pants to the

1:11:32.439 --> 1:11:35.680
<v Speaker 2>exclusion of all of their possibilities. They cannot say that anymore. Right,

1:11:35.720 --> 1:11:38.680
<v Speaker 2>the DOJ guys, Right, people who are actually working for

1:11:39.000 --> 1:11:42.799
<v Speaker 2>the Department of Justice, you know, doing forensic analysis can't.

1:11:42.560 --> 1:11:45.040
<v Speaker 3>Create success more. I'm I'm so glad we got that

1:11:45.240 --> 1:11:46.120
<v Speaker 3>very basic thing.

1:11:46.840 --> 1:11:51.519
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, so at least at least that's good. So yeah,

1:11:51.680 --> 1:11:56.960
<v Speaker 2>you know, there's a lot that's angry, frustrating about this today.

1:11:57.720 --> 1:11:59.920
<v Speaker 2>There's more here. I wanted to go into where are

1:12:00.000 --> 1:12:01.680
<v Speaker 2>aready running so long? But I do feel like I

1:12:01.720 --> 1:12:03.800
<v Speaker 2>would be remiss if I didn't at least let you

1:12:03.880 --> 1:12:07.439
<v Speaker 2>know about the latest bullshit forensic science that I came across,

1:12:07.800 --> 1:12:10.800
<v Speaker 2>which is exciting field of nine to one to one

1:12:10.840 --> 1:12:16.320
<v Speaker 2>call analysis. This is the result of a deputy police chief,

1:12:16.360 --> 1:12:20.560
<v Speaker 2>Tracy Harpster, from Dayton, Ohio, who had no particular experience

1:12:20.880 --> 1:12:24.360
<v Speaker 2>solving murders prior to attending a course at the FBI

1:12:24.439 --> 1:12:27.599
<v Speaker 2>Academy in two thousand and four. He made a teacher

1:12:27.640 --> 1:12:30.280
<v Speaker 2>there that he thought was fucking gray, and he decides

1:12:30.320 --> 1:12:33.000
<v Speaker 2>to go get his master's degree at the U of Cincinnati,

1:12:33.000 --> 1:12:35.480
<v Speaker 2>and his thesis involves he listens to one hundred recordings

1:12:35.600 --> 1:12:38.160
<v Speaker 2>of nine to one one calls. Half are from innocent

1:12:38.200 --> 1:12:40.320
<v Speaker 2>people and half are from people who were guilty of

1:12:40.360 --> 1:12:43.479
<v Speaker 2>the climes crimes they were reporting. He then analyzed the

1:12:43.479 --> 1:12:47.320
<v Speaker 2>calls for clues on the cues guilty people gave off. Now,

1:12:47.800 --> 1:12:51.519
<v Speaker 2>this study is peer reviewed, but it is a peer

1:12:51.560 --> 1:12:54.240
<v Speaker 2>reviewed it's labeled in the where it was published as

1:12:54.320 --> 1:12:57.360
<v Speaker 2>exploratory research, so it's not When I say it's a

1:12:57.400 --> 1:12:59.320
<v Speaker 2>peer reviewed study, that doesn't mean that a bunch of

1:12:59.320 --> 1:13:02.280
<v Speaker 2>scientists to read this is a great way to determine

1:13:02.280 --> 1:13:04.080
<v Speaker 2>whether or not people making a nine to one one

1:13:04.080 --> 1:13:06.960
<v Speaker 2>call committed a crime. They agreed that, like, this is

1:13:07.000 --> 1:13:09.280
<v Speaker 2>interesting and more research should be done, right, And in fact,

1:13:09.320 --> 1:13:10.760
<v Speaker 2>one of the people who helped him with this has

1:13:10.960 --> 1:13:12.519
<v Speaker 2>gone on to be like, I think what he is

1:13:12.600 --> 1:13:15.679
<v Speaker 2>doing is not acceptable now because what he now does

1:13:15.960 --> 1:13:19.120
<v Speaker 2>is teach cops all around the country for huge amounts

1:13:19.120 --> 1:13:22.080
<v Speaker 2>of money how to tell with people are guilty based

1:13:22.120 --> 1:13:25.320
<v Speaker 2>on things in nine one one calls. What kinds of things? Well,

1:13:25.520 --> 1:13:29.000
<v Speaker 2>if you use the word please, you're probably guilty. In

1:13:29.040 --> 1:13:31.439
<v Speaker 2>a nine one one call. If you say huh in

1:13:31.479 --> 1:13:34.880
<v Speaker 2>response to a dispatcher's question, that's an indicator of guilt.

1:13:35.280 --> 1:13:38.160
<v Speaker 2>If you say something like please help me, that could

1:13:38.200 --> 1:13:39.240
<v Speaker 2>mean that you're guilty.

1:13:39.479 --> 1:13:41.680
<v Speaker 3>Please, huh and please help me are like three of

1:13:41.720 --> 1:13:42.840
<v Speaker 3>my favorite things to say.

1:13:43.479 --> 1:13:45.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's it's cool.

1:13:45.479 --> 1:13:46.439
<v Speaker 3>I want to I want to.

1:13:46.479 --> 1:13:51.080
<v Speaker 2>Quote from a pro publica analysis that's just fucking infuriating.

1:13:51.080 --> 1:13:54.320
<v Speaker 2>This is a Colorado sheriff's deputy who asks Harpster to

1:13:54.360 --> 1:13:56.640
<v Speaker 2>analyze the nine one one call of a widow suspective

1:13:56.640 --> 1:13:57.559
<v Speaker 2>of murdering your husband.

1:13:57.680 --> 1:13:58.080
<v Speaker 3>Quote.

1:13:58.360 --> 1:14:00.640
<v Speaker 2>The widow said the word blood for a example, and

1:14:00.680 --> 1:14:04.160
<v Speaker 2>that's a guilty indicator. Bleeding, however, is not she said

1:14:04.240 --> 1:14:07.000
<v Speaker 2>somebody at different points, which shows a lack of commitment.

1:14:07.400 --> 1:14:09.920
<v Speaker 2>Witnesses to a crime scene should be able to report

1:14:09.920 --> 1:14:13.800
<v Speaker 2>their observations clearly. Harpster and Adams wrote, she was inappropriately

1:14:13.840 --> 1:14:16.840
<v Speaker 2>polite because she said I'm sorry and thank you. She

1:14:16.960 --> 1:14:20.760
<v Speaker 2>interrupted herself, which wastes valuable time and may add confusion.

1:14:21.080 --> 1:14:23.720
<v Speaker 2>She tried to divert attention by saying, God, who would

1:14:23.800 --> 1:14:27.120
<v Speaker 2>do this? Harpster and Adams commented, this is a curious

1:14:27.160 --> 1:14:28.559
<v Speaker 2>and unexpected question.

1:14:31.320 --> 1:14:36.080
<v Speaker 3>This is fucking insane. Yeah, this is like nineteen eighty

1:14:36.080 --> 1:14:37.719
<v Speaker 3>four level of like.

1:14:37.920 --> 1:14:40.760
<v Speaker 2>This guy, this widow gets convicted. Yeah, maybe she did it.

1:14:40.760 --> 1:14:42.800
<v Speaker 2>There was other evidence, you know, but this is some

1:14:42.880 --> 1:14:44.679
<v Speaker 2>of the evidence they convict her on. And that makes

1:14:44.680 --> 1:14:47.920
<v Speaker 2>me very uneasy because this shit is bullcrap.

1:14:48.280 --> 1:14:51.439
<v Speaker 3>Right. The whole idea that like, witnesses.

1:14:50.880 --> 1:14:52.680
<v Speaker 2>To a crime scene should be able to report their

1:14:52.720 --> 1:14:56.759
<v Speaker 2>observations clearly. Have you fucking met a crime scene witness?

1:14:56.920 --> 1:14:59.040
<v Speaker 2>Have you watched have you talked to someone who just

1:14:59.080 --> 1:15:00.719
<v Speaker 2>saw a violent committed?

1:15:01.360 --> 1:15:01.559
<v Speaker 1>Right?

1:15:01.920 --> 1:15:06.880
<v Speaker 3>They're bad at doing that they're terrible, I mean understandably,

1:15:06.920 --> 1:15:10.880
<v Speaker 3>so that's like what they've just experienced. I mean it

1:15:10.920 --> 1:15:13.360
<v Speaker 3>would be like there's a part of me I get

1:15:13.400 --> 1:15:16.120
<v Speaker 3>why all these things work because they're all fun. Like

1:15:16.160 --> 1:15:18.200
<v Speaker 3>it's all fun. Like this is like, right, wouldn't it

1:15:18.280 --> 1:15:21.320
<v Speaker 3>be fun to be able to detect someone's line based

1:15:21.360 --> 1:15:24.559
<v Speaker 3>on like some subtle cues like that, you know, but.

1:15:24.520 --> 1:15:26.320
<v Speaker 2>Cops love being able to take like a five day

1:15:26.360 --> 1:15:28.760
<v Speaker 2>course and say, now it can tell it when a

1:15:28.840 --> 1:15:31.480
<v Speaker 2>nine to one one call is a lie by a murderer.

1:15:31.600 --> 1:15:34.680
<v Speaker 3>You know, these skills, It seems like it would be

1:15:34.720 --> 1:15:36.400
<v Speaker 3>a lot of fun. I get why people like it,

1:15:36.520 --> 1:15:38.960
<v Speaker 3>but like we have to take we have to learn

1:15:39.040 --> 1:15:41.680
<v Speaker 3>as a country to take a step back. Just take

1:15:41.720 --> 1:15:43.880
<v Speaker 3>a step back every now and then and look at

1:15:43.880 --> 1:15:45.439
<v Speaker 3>what we're doing. This might not.

1:15:46.960 --> 1:15:49.719
<v Speaker 2>He is taught police and continues to teach police officers.

1:15:49.720 --> 1:15:53.640
<v Speaker 2>I think twenty six states at this point. Twenty researchers

1:15:54.280 --> 1:15:58.559
<v Speaker 2>twenty researchers from seven federal government agencies, universities, and advocacy

1:15:58.600 --> 1:16:01.920
<v Speaker 2>groups have tested his methods against other samples of nine

1:16:01.920 --> 1:16:04.800
<v Speaker 2>to one one calls to see if the guilty indicators

1:16:04.800 --> 1:16:07.800
<v Speaker 2>that he points out do correlate with guilt, and these

1:16:08.200 --> 1:16:12.440
<v Speaker 2>studies have consistently found no relationship for most of the indicators.

1:16:12.600 --> 1:16:12.920
<v Speaker 3>Oh wow.

1:16:13.040 --> 1:16:17.320
<v Speaker 2>Two separate studies FBI Behavioral Analysis Unit experts warrened law

1:16:17.400 --> 1:16:23.040
<v Speaker 2>enforcement officers that their results contradicted harpsters and police probably

1:16:23.080 --> 1:16:26.400
<v Speaker 2>shouldn't be using this shit. Despite that, the FBI repeatedly

1:16:26.479 --> 1:16:30.879
<v Speaker 2>suggests his like like recommends him as an expert in cases.

1:16:30.960 --> 1:16:35.200
<v Speaker 3>So it's good, amazing, It's amazing again, no matter how

1:16:35.280 --> 1:16:39.479
<v Speaker 3>dumb it seems to be, it's just these new levels

1:16:39.479 --> 1:16:41.000
<v Speaker 3>of dumb that I discover.

1:16:41.720 --> 1:16:44.280
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I love it. I'm sure we'll be learning more

1:16:44.280 --> 1:16:46.439
<v Speaker 2>about this guy. Pro public as seems to be, has

1:16:46.479 --> 1:16:52.240
<v Speaker 2>been reporting quite a bit on him lately, So that's good. Anyway.

1:16:53.680 --> 1:16:54.880
<v Speaker 2>Don't call nine one one.

1:16:56.240 --> 1:17:01.640
<v Speaker 3>Really, I'm not sure I can back that one.

1:17:00.160 --> 1:17:03.559
<v Speaker 1>Normally, when we do an episode and it's I can

1:17:03.840 --> 1:17:06.559
<v Speaker 1>shut it off in my brain right away, because we

1:17:06.640 --> 1:17:09.040
<v Speaker 1>do so much of what we do. I'm going to

1:17:09.120 --> 1:17:11.320
<v Speaker 1>be mad about the gene thing for a really long time.

1:17:15.560 --> 1:17:18.400
<v Speaker 2>It's it's it's good stuff. Look, folks, if there's a

1:17:18.479 --> 1:17:22.679
<v Speaker 2>lesson here again, never call nine one one. Always take

1:17:22.920 --> 1:17:25.360
<v Speaker 2>justice into your own hands. That's the safe way to

1:17:25.400 --> 1:17:26.200
<v Speaker 2>do this, you know.

1:17:27.160 --> 1:17:29.200
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, No, I didn't say that. I didn't say that.

1:17:30.240 --> 1:17:32.599
<v Speaker 3>The doctor didn't say that. The doctor that's the podcast

1:17:32.640 --> 1:17:35.120
<v Speaker 3>didn't say that. The reverend, the one true reverend doctor

1:17:35.160 --> 1:17:36.800
<v Speaker 3>on this podcast did not say that.

1:17:37.320 --> 1:17:41.160
<v Speaker 2>Mm hmm, well I don't know. Uh. What I will

1:17:41.160 --> 1:17:43.360
<v Speaker 2>say is, if you call nine one one, don't use

1:17:43.400 --> 1:17:44.160
<v Speaker 2>the word blood.

1:17:44.640 --> 1:17:49.599
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I don't say please, don't please, you mean, don't hesitate.

1:17:49.800 --> 1:17:51.720
<v Speaker 3>Just start yelling at them. I guess that's the only

1:17:51.760 --> 1:17:52.280
<v Speaker 3>way to do it.

1:17:52.920 --> 1:17:55.719
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, atonal shrieking.

1:17:56.360 --> 1:17:58.559
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, there you go a.

1:17:58.640 --> 1:18:05.360
<v Speaker 2>Shriek atonally and get them your address. That's it. Cool stuff.

1:18:05.600 --> 1:18:06.760
<v Speaker 3>I am fantastic.

1:18:07.160 --> 1:18:08.200
<v Speaker 4>I'm mad.

1:18:09.280 --> 1:18:12.799
<v Speaker 2>Well, that's my job done. That was fine, everybody.

1:18:12.800 --> 1:18:13.240
<v Speaker 3>That was fun.

1:18:14.280 --> 1:18:17.280
<v Speaker 2>Doctor Hoda anywhere people can find you.

1:18:17.000 --> 1:18:19.960
<v Speaker 3>Please listen to my podcast. I like it when people listen.

1:18:20.000 --> 1:18:22.519
<v Speaker 3>I enjoy that very much. It's called the House of Pod.

1:18:22.680 --> 1:18:25.479
<v Speaker 3>It is a fun medical podcast. And I know you're

1:18:25.479 --> 1:18:28.120
<v Speaker 3>thinking you probably wouldn't like a medical podcast, but you will,

1:18:28.479 --> 1:18:30.720
<v Speaker 3>you will, and you will listen. You will like it.

1:18:31.040 --> 1:18:32.760
<v Speaker 3>I think it's a good chance you might enjoy it.

1:18:33.800 --> 1:18:35.760
<v Speaker 3>Thank you so much for having me on, and I

1:18:35.800 --> 1:18:37.680
<v Speaker 3>really appreciate This is always so much fun for me.

1:18:38.240 --> 1:18:42.440
<v Speaker 2>And look, folks out there, if you're a lawyer, a prosecutor,

1:18:42.880 --> 1:18:47.400
<v Speaker 2>DA or whatever. I have started advertising my services as

1:18:47.680 --> 1:18:53.240
<v Speaker 2>a uniquely skilled guilt science expert, which basically means you

1:18:53.280 --> 1:18:55.560
<v Speaker 2>pay me fifteen hundred dollars and I'll look at a

1:18:55.600 --> 1:18:58.160
<v Speaker 2>guy and go, oh, yeah, that motherfucker did it. And

1:18:58.200 --> 1:18:59.559
<v Speaker 2>I'll do that in the court room. You know.

1:19:00.439 --> 1:19:02.800
<v Speaker 3>So when this episode ends, can we just do a

1:19:02.840 --> 1:19:05.320
<v Speaker 3>quick round of two truths and a lie and see

1:19:05.400 --> 1:19:07.479
<v Speaker 3>if we can guess who's lying to lose it?

1:19:07.920 --> 1:19:08.559
<v Speaker 2>There we go.

1:19:08.840 --> 1:19:10.360
<v Speaker 3>We can even do it on air too, But I

1:19:10.400 --> 1:19:11.880
<v Speaker 3>really want to see if I can guess when you

1:19:11.920 --> 1:19:12.559
<v Speaker 3>guys are lying.

1:19:12.880 --> 1:19:15.040
<v Speaker 2>Okay, Okay, let's do it. Let's do it, Cove. That

1:19:15.080 --> 1:19:18.160
<v Speaker 2>seems like a fun way to end our episode. Okay, okay,

1:19:18.520 --> 1:19:19.080
<v Speaker 2>in law.

1:19:19.280 --> 1:19:20.960
<v Speaker 3>Come come a little closer to the screen. I want

1:19:21.000 --> 1:19:24.760
<v Speaker 3>to see if the facial micro expressions.

1:19:23.920 --> 1:19:27.120
<v Speaker 2>Expressions sut me. Okay, move my window over so I'm

1:19:27.120 --> 1:19:28.160
<v Speaker 2>looking directly at it.

1:19:28.280 --> 1:19:31.720
<v Speaker 3>Okay, perfect, now, Robert, please tell me if you if

1:19:31.760 --> 1:19:33.639
<v Speaker 3>you would, I'm gonna ask you a couple of questions

1:19:33.680 --> 1:19:36.000
<v Speaker 3>and I want two of them to be true and

1:19:36.120 --> 1:19:40.240
<v Speaker 3>one of them to be a lie. God, what was

1:19:40.320 --> 1:19:46.320
<v Speaker 3>the name of the street you grew up on? Seeger?

1:19:47.200 --> 1:19:47.799
<v Speaker 3>That's true?

1:19:49.000 --> 1:19:57.600
<v Speaker 2>No, it's not. Dam absolutely a lie. All right, I

1:19:57.600 --> 1:19:59.880
<v Speaker 2>don't even remember this name. I mean it actually might

1:19:59.920 --> 1:20:01.719
<v Speaker 2>be you true because I have no idea what street

1:20:01.720 --> 1:20:03.760
<v Speaker 2>I grew up on, Like it depends on what do

1:20:03.800 --> 1:20:05.519
<v Speaker 2>you even mean by that? Like I've lived in so

1:20:05.560 --> 1:20:08.599
<v Speaker 2>many places as a kid, I remember like a couple

1:20:08.680 --> 1:20:09.400
<v Speaker 2>of the streets.

1:20:09.880 --> 1:20:12.560
<v Speaker 3>Well, you know, I guess it's not an exact science.

1:20:13.880 --> 1:20:15.559
<v Speaker 2>What we're learning.

1:20:16.000 --> 1:20:17.120
<v Speaker 1>You asked me a question.

1:20:17.200 --> 1:20:22.439
<v Speaker 3>Okay, okay, Sophie. How many times have you seen the

1:20:22.520 --> 1:20:27.280
<v Speaker 3>movie Titanic? Yeah? Look at me when you answer this

1:20:27.280 --> 1:20:28.840
<v Speaker 3>that you can't look down like you're doing. That looks

1:20:28.840 --> 1:20:30.760
<v Speaker 3>suspicious and I think you're lying already. Yeah.

1:20:30.880 --> 1:20:32.240
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, we should have asked her.

1:20:32.320 --> 1:20:35.360
<v Speaker 4>I'm counting. And now are we talking ever?

1:20:35.840 --> 1:20:39.840
<v Speaker 3>Or whoa my goodness? In the last year, I guess

1:20:39.920 --> 1:20:44.960
<v Speaker 3>I don't know. Yeah, twice, that's obviously a lie. No

1:20:44.960 --> 1:20:46.400
<v Speaker 3>one's watched that Titanic.

1:20:46.280 --> 1:20:48.240
<v Speaker 4>Watched and I watched it twice. That was the truth.

1:20:48.280 --> 1:20:49.400
<v Speaker 4>I would never lie to you.

1:20:49.560 --> 1:20:52.240
<v Speaker 2>I would never see I thought it was a lie

1:20:52.240 --> 1:20:54.200
<v Speaker 2>because I assumed you'd watched it a lot more.

1:20:54.520 --> 1:20:57.280
<v Speaker 1>No, no, I thought, once in theaters and what's that home?

1:20:57.760 --> 1:21:00.519
<v Speaker 1>Once in theaters on the anniversary, and it's at home.

1:21:00.560 --> 1:21:02.880
<v Speaker 1>I would never lie to you. You are my friend.

1:21:03.760 --> 1:21:05.360
<v Speaker 3>Okay, you're right, this is this is.

1:21:08.080 --> 1:21:10.280
<v Speaker 4>Robert would lie to you to prove his friendship.

1:21:10.320 --> 1:21:14.520
<v Speaker 2>Oh, just for fun, just as a bit sometimes.

1:21:14.600 --> 1:21:19.120
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I mean, and uh, I am really good at

1:21:19.240 --> 1:21:23.280
<v Speaker 3>detecting what people lie. Is when everyone thinks and nobody.

1:21:22.960 --> 1:21:25.400
<v Speaker 2>Is yeah, nobody. Nobody's very good at it.

1:21:25.960 --> 1:21:26.280
<v Speaker 3>Nobody.

1:21:27.520 --> 1:21:31.000
<v Speaker 2>That part's okay, because none of human civilization would work

1:21:31.040 --> 1:21:32.760
<v Speaker 2>if we were all good at telling when we were

1:21:32.800 --> 1:21:33.400
<v Speaker 2>being lied to.

1:21:33.520 --> 1:21:33.640
<v Speaker 1>Ye.

1:21:34.000 --> 1:21:39.000
<v Speaker 2>So, so much of peace and tranquility in civilization relies

1:21:39.080 --> 1:21:43.280
<v Speaker 2>upon us not catching every little lie somebody tells us.

1:21:43.439 --> 1:21:45.920
<v Speaker 3>Oh my god, if you could read people's minds, it

1:21:45.920 --> 1:21:49.839
<v Speaker 3>would be absolute chaos. Yeah, absolutely, things would be terrible.

1:21:50.640 --> 1:21:54.080
<v Speaker 1>And tend this out, I would like to plug that.

1:21:54.160 --> 1:21:57.240
<v Speaker 1>We have a new show launching momentarily on cools one Media,

1:21:57.280 --> 1:22:01.240
<v Speaker 1>hosting by Jamie Loftus. It's a weekly podcast called sixteenth

1:22:01.320 --> 1:22:01.960
<v Speaker 1>Minute of Fame.

1:22:02.120 --> 1:22:02.720
<v Speaker 4>Look for that.

1:22:03.840 --> 1:22:07.040
<v Speaker 2>Speaking of failures in the criminal justice system, Jamie still

1:22:07.080 --> 1:22:09.200
<v Speaker 2>has not been brought to justice for those murders.

1:22:09.200 --> 1:22:12.400
<v Speaker 3>And I even I.

1:22:12.400 --> 1:22:14.240
<v Speaker 2>Forgot the name of the city I like about it,

1:22:15.640 --> 1:22:16.519
<v Speaker 2>Grand Rapids.

1:22:16.640 --> 1:22:18.839
<v Speaker 3>Oh, I thought it was Gary, Indiana for some reason.

1:22:18.600 --> 1:22:22.439
<v Speaker 2>Gary Indiana. Maybe she did in Gary, Indiana. Next week

1:22:22.760 --> 1:22:26.519
<v Speaker 2>we're our investigation into Jamie's crimes and Gary will.

1:22:26.400 --> 1:22:31.240
<v Speaker 3>Have pursueddor dowsing for bodies.

1:22:31.320 --> 1:22:33.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, get doctor Voss on the case.

1:22:33.400 --> 1:22:36.040
<v Speaker 4>I don't know. I need to see all of Jamie's genes.

1:22:38.040 --> 1:22:40.559
<v Speaker 2>We got to do a gene and how this Jamie?

1:22:42.320 --> 1:22:44.800
<v Speaker 2>Make sure the creases don't match too much.

1:22:51.439 --> 1:22:54.120
<v Speaker 4>Behind the Bastards is a production of cool Zone Media.

1:22:54.560 --> 1:22:55.919
<v Speaker 4>Or more from cool Zone Media.

1:22:56.040 --> 1:22:59.680
<v Speaker 1>Visit our website cool zonemedia dot com, or check us

1:22:59.680 --> 1:23:02.680
<v Speaker 1>out on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you

1:23:02.760 --> 1:23:03.680
<v Speaker 1>get your podcasts.