FROM Peter Marone
Forensic Science and the Wrongful Conviction of Innocent People Mistakes made at the FBI's crime lab may have helped put thousands of people behind bars, based on faulty analysis of forensic evidence. The alarm bells went off in 1995, when an FBI special agent testified in the high-profile terrorism trial of the Muslim sheik suspected of plotting the first attack on the World Trade Center. A chemist and lawyer, he told the court he'd been pressured by his superiors to ignore forensic findings that didn't support the government's theory of the bombing. The uproar that followed prompted a Justice Department investigation. But the report, which took nearly a decade to complete, was never released publicly. A Washington Post report found several wrongful convictions. What about the other cases? How reliable is forensic evidence? Are new standards and oversight needed?
Is the threat from Russia missing from the Russia meddling probe? There's much being made about the Trump administration's possible ties with Russia. But the bottom line is Russia's effort to influence American democracy. Do the President and his aides care enough to take action before voters go back to the polls?
Trump plays scolder-in-chief with NATO allies At the opening of NATO’s dramatic new headquarters in Brussels today, President Trump acknowledged that Article 5 — promising that “an attack on one nation is an attack on all” -- has only been invoked one time: in the aftermath of September 11. But the President failed to provide what 27 other Alliance members have been waiting for: a re-commitment by America’s new leader to Article 5. Instead, they got a scolding.
Terrorism and tweets, hate speech and murder Just days before an election, Britain is coping with a rash of deadly terrorism, and Prime Minister Theresa May is on the defensive. And again today, President Trump has tweeted criticism of the Mayor of London. Later, a double murder in Portland, Oregon has revealed the ugly past of a supposedly “progressive” city. One immediate question: is “hate speech” protected by the First Amendment?