Blog
50 Founders Plaza
East Hartford, CT 06108
50 Founders Plaza
East Hartford, CT 06108
Thanks to television shows like CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, Law & Order, their respective spin-offs, and similar programs, the average person tends to have an unrealistic view of criminal forensics. The limitations of television require such shows to compress months of police work and lab testing into 60 minutes—less if you are not counting commercial breaks. Additionally, the accuracy of the labs on these shows is rarely, if ever, questioned. In reality, however, certain forensic testing processes may not be as accurate as we have been led to believe, including the near-sacred area of DNA testing.
In a disturbing study, researchers at the National Institute of Standards and Technology tested the accuracy of 108 separate crime labs, including 105 in the United States and three in Canada. To do so, the team sent the same mixture of DNA to each lab and asked the labs to compare the mixture to DNA taken from three known “suspects.”
When you are injured in a car crash, slip and fall accident, or any other type of accident caused by the actions or negligence of another party, you are generally entitled to collect compensation for your injuries. This means that determining the severity of your injuries is an important part of the process.
If you sustained injuries to a part of your body that has never been seriously hurt before, it is reasonable to assume that any damage was the result of the accident. If, however, you sustained injuries to a part of your body that had been hurt before, it can be difficult to know for sure what damage was caused by the accident and what damage had been done previously. Pre-existing injuries can present serious complications in your pursuit of full compensation, but it is possible to collect in spite of them.
Did you know that you could end up in jail if you cannot pay your bills? This does not even refer to court-imposed fines or court-ordered obligations like child support. You could find yourself in jail over private debts such as student loans, medical bills, and unpaid rent. Now, you may be wondering how this is possible considering that debtors’ prisons were outlawed in the United States nearly 200 years ago. The answer is that private companies have found a loophole in the laws of dozens of states that allows them to use the threat of incarceration to generate payment of outstanding debt—a practice that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) says criminalizes poverty.
Technically, debtors’ prisons are illegal in the United States and have been since 1833. In recent years, however, private companies have begun “using the criminal justice system to punish debtors and terrorize them into paying, even when a debt is in dispute or when the debtor has no ability to pay,” says a new report from the ACLU. According to the report, tens of thousands of warrants are issued each year in relation to unpaid private debts, but it is impossible to determine the exact number because court records do not usually track this category of warrants.
It is a scene that is often portrayed in Hollywood thriller movies: a person is driving at highway speeds when they need to apply the brakes. Instead of the slowing the car, however, the brake pedal sinks to the floor, all but completely useless. For a West Hartford woman, this unlikely scenario became all too real when the brakes in the car she was driving suddenly stopped working, leading to a serious accident.
The incident occurred in July of last year on Interstate 84 in West Hartford. The woman had just picked up her daughter’s 1964 Chrysler New Yorker at a repair shop in Clinton. On that particular day, the repair shop fixed a flat tire on the classic car. The same shop had serviced the New Yorker on at least 10 separate occasions in the 15 months leading up to that day.
After fixing the flat, the repair shop released the car to the woman, representing that it was safe to drive and in sound mechanical condition. In reality, however, there was a leak in the left rear brake assembly. The problem became evident when the woman tried to slow the car to exit the interstate. The Chrysler struck another vehicle, crashed into a guardrail, and went over an embankment. The driver reportedly suffered several serious including fractured ribs and concussion. She remained in the hospital for four days followed by more than three weeks in a rehabilitation center, her lawyer indicated.
California was the first state in the U.S. to legalize the use of medical marijuana. In the two decades since, another 30 states have followed suit. Another 15 states have legalized medical cannabis products with limited THC content. In addition, nine states plus Washington, D.C. have legalized the recreational use of marijuana.
Recent opinion polls conducted by the Pew Research Center and Quinnipiac University show that public support for the legalization of recreational marijuana is now at an all-time high. Between 61 and 63 percent of American voters are reportedly in favor of legalizing recreational use for adults while just 33 to 37 percent are opposed. The main problem, however, is the prohibition of cannabis that still exists at the federal level, leading many to see parallels between the government’s approach to marijuana and the ban on alcohol that largely defined the 1920s.
If you have been involved in a car accident—whether or not you were injured—you probably know that there is often a great deal of negotiation regarding which insurance company will be paying and how much. In many cases, there are no formal, sit-down negotiating sessions. Instead, the involved insurers often work behind the scenes, communicating only with you when necessary to accept their offers.
Sometimes, however, negotiations fail to produce a result that meets the needs of those who suffered losses as a result of the accident. This is especially true when someone has been injured. A recent case from Waterbury demonstrates that aggressive litigation can sometimes be the best option for recovering compensation.
A Recap of the Case
In February of 2015, a 33-year-old woman and her 16-year-old son were injured as they drove through a parking lot in downtown Waterbury. The vehicle in which they were traveling was struck by another car as it attempted to back out of a parking space. The woman suffered neck and lower back injuries, while the teen suffered back injuries. According to court documents, the woman and the driver of the second vehicle exchanged insurance information, but the police were not called.
The United States is in the midst of a horrific crisis related to drug abuse. The problem is so widespread that it is largely known as an epidemic. On an average day, about 115 people in the U.S. die as the result of an opioid overdose. Opioids include prescription pain relievers like Vicodin and OxyContin, as well as heroin and fentanyl. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the financial cost of prescription opioid misuse—not included illegal drugs like heroin—is about $78.5 billion annually.
There are two primary philosophies when it comes to dealing with America’s drug problem. The first is more draconian, and it involves harsh criminal prosecution for those who use, sell, and manufacture illegal drugs, as well as those who use otherwise-legal prescription drugs in illegal ways. The second, one could argue, is more compassionate, and it involves treating substance abuse like a disease. Laws across the country seem to bounce back and forth between the two sides when it comes to individual drug users, but when an overdose death occurs, the prosecution philosophy often takes over.
We all know that drunk driving is a serious problem—one that kills thousands of people each year on American roadways and injures tens of thousands more. Drunk drivers continue to cause accidents despite massive educational campaigns, clear laws, and enforcement efforts.
Over the last few years, more and more states have relaxed their laws regarding the use of a different substance that is considered by many to be as dangerous as alcohol—at least for those who are behind the wheel. The legalization of medical and recreational marijuana in states around the country has created new concerns about drugged driving and keep the roads safe. Unfortunately, there is no breathalyzer equivalent for marijuana, and it is often difficult for law enforcement to obtain solid evidence that a driver is under the influence of drugs. In neighboring Massachusetts, however, a test program is underway that could prove useful in potential drugged driving cases—including drugged driving accidents.
When prosecuting a high-profile criminal case, prosecutors will go to great lengths to provide enough evidence for the jury to convict the defendant on the charges at hand. In many cases, such evidence comes in the form of forensic analysis and conclusions made by the individual who made the analysis. Because such topics are often dense and difficult to understand, jurors often trust the offered testimony because they are told that the individual has been trained in a particular field. Sometimes, however, the such “evidence” and conclusions lack scientific support, as a case in Texas recently demonstrated.
The Murder Trial
In 1985, a Texas jury convicted a high school principal of murdering his wife. One of the key pieces of evidence was blood found on a flashlight in the trunk of the man’s car. Despite the man’s claims that he was asleep in a hotel room 120 miles away from the murder scene, a police detective analyzed the bloodstain patterns on the flashlight and concluded that the flashlight was being held at the time of the murder. The detective—who had undergone about 40 hours of blood spatter analysis training—claimed that bloodstains were consistent with “back spatter” from a close-range shooting. Since the trial took place in 1985, DNA testing was not available to confirm that the blood belonged to the murder victim, but it was determined to be the right blood type—but type O could be a match for about half of the U.S. population.
Whether we like to admit it or not, we make judgments about people every day based on their hair. We notice whether someone’s hair looks clean or not, whether it is styled nicely or unkempt, and whether it is “too long” or “too short” for our own personal tastes. While your hair can visually broadcast a great deal about you to the outside world, it can also serve as a sort of record-keeping system. In fact, by conducting certain tests on your hair, scientists can tell whether you smoke, drink to excess, do not drink at all, or use illegal drugs. Such tests have even found their way into courtrooms and could have implications in personal injury lawsuits.
A Retrospective History
When the human body breaks down ingested substances like drugs or alcohol, microscopic remnants of the drug or byproducts of breaking down the drug remain in various places in the body. As hair grows, it is “built” using components that include these remnants, leaving traces of the drug—called metabolites—in the hair permanently.
50 Founders Plaza
