“There is no acceptable reason for [a detective to be present during an autopsy].”

This past weekend, I read an essay in the Washington Post that left me with a case of "TV lied to me!" Specifically, Forever Knight, and just about every other police procedural told from the primary perspective of the police officers. (A few procedurals told from the primary perspective of the medical examiners have managed to get this right.) A certain genre storytelling shorthand is flat wrong, and ... we should be able to get some fanfic stories out of that discrepancy, I imagine?

This fannish insight is not the primary point of the essay: "Study finds cognitive bias in how medical examiners evaluate child deaths" by Radley Balko (Feb. 20, 2021 at 8:33 a.m. PST).

Rather, what leaped up and grabbed me with its real-world obviousness, at odds with so many scenes from so many procedurals, is:

...to the extent possible, medical examiners should be given only medically relevant information. Often this isn’t the case, because in much of the country, medical examiners are considered part of the prosecution’s team, not independent analysts. So they’re privy to information that can corrupt their analysis. “I’ve seen cases where a detective was present during the autopsy itself,” Dror says. “There is no acceptable reason for that.” To that end, we could reduce cognitive bias by ensuring that medical examiners’ offices are independent of police and prosecutors, and that law enforcement officials don’t have a say in an analyst’s raises, promotions or performance reviews. That the very notion of a state ME testifying for the defense seems to offend some prosecutors demonstrates that in many jurisdictions, an ME isn’t expected to be independent. [emphasis mine]

( Read more... )