Still believe the prosecution fights fair?

Two years ago, the bullet-matching technology known as comparative lead analysis was discredited by the FBI, who had previously used the technology as part of their crime lab analysis for three decades. Even though the FBI had decided to stop using the ineffective technology, it took no steps to alert either U.S. Attorneys or criminal defendants who had been convicted through the use of such discredited technology that they might have a very strong basis to challenge their convictions. Thankfully, 60 Minutes and the Washington Post drew attention to the problem, and now the FBI has agreed to conduct a review of cases in which the technology was used and to alert prosecutors where FBI employees may have offered expert forensic testimony that is now acknowledged to be inaccurate. Unfortunately, many individual state crime labs may have also used the discredited technology and there is no way to know how many criminal convictions are now potentially suspect.

Because prosecutors have plenty to do and may not be so eager to help out some convicted folks with strong basis to challenge their convictions, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NADCL) and the Innocence Network are creating attorney task forces to review old cases and determine if there is a basis to challenge those convictions independent of the possibility that the prosecutor will be alerted by the FBI. They point out that alerting the prosecution is not enough, because it does not ensure that the convicted person will be able to pursue legal remedies available to him or her if their conviction is affected by such testimony, without legal representation and expert witnesses who understand how to explain the flaws in the technology.

Once again, the Innocence Project is showing the ugly underbelly of our criminal justice system and stepping into the void where few lawyers would otherwise fear to tread. I really don't know how anyone can hear about the work that they are doing and have done and still spill forth the same mindless belief that prosecutorial misconduct and unjust convictions don't exist. How much evidence do you need before you accept that you're just wrong?