
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


The criminal justice system and science are both broadly looking for the same thing - the truth. But in many cases the two don’t mix well. Whether it’s court cases that attempt to decide the truth of a scientific dispute, or the use of fingerprints, DNA, or statistics by the prosecution in a murder case, a lot can go wrong - and there’s a lot at stake.
Inspired by the recent discussion, or perhaps lack of discussion, around [a criminal case nobody in the UK can talk about for legal reasons], Tom and Stuart spend this episode looking into what happens when science meets the law.
Our favourite online magazine is Works in Progress - so it’s particularly pleasing that they’re the sponsors of The Studies Show. Works in Progress publish in-depth essays on underrated ideas to improve the world, covering the history and future of science and technology. Go to worksinprogress.co to read their entire archive for free.
Show notes
* UK man arrested for airport-related joke (2010); UK man arrested and punished (narrowly avoiding prison) for saying “burn auld fella, buuuuurn” upon the death of “Captain Tom” (2022)
* Simon Singh successfully sued by chiropractors (but then successfully appeals; 2010)
* Paper on the Italian criminal cases that helped fuel the anti-vaccine movement
* Jim Carrey campaigns against vaccines
* Tom’s 2018 New Scientist article on glyphosate and cancer
* 1995 article on the “phantom risks” of breast implants
* Helen Joyce on the Sally Clark case
* Tom’s 2024 Unherd article on “the dangers of trial by statistics”
* 2022 Royal Statistical Society report on the same topic
* How Bayes-savvy statisticians helped overturn Lucia de Berk’s conviction
* Gerd Gigerenzer on OJ Simpson
* 2022 philosophy paper on the issues with forensic science
* 2016 White House report on the gaps in forensic science
* Dror & Hampikian (2011) study on bias in DNA interpretation
* 2009 “Texas sharpshooter” paper on the rarity (or not) of DNA matches
* Useful 2023 review of human factors research in forensic science
* Interviews with 150 forensic examiners on potential biases in their work
Credits
The Studies Show is produced by Julian Mayers at Yada Yada Productions.
 By Tom Chivers and Stuart Ritchie
By Tom Chivers and Stuart Ritchie4.6
6060 ratings
The criminal justice system and science are both broadly looking for the same thing - the truth. But in many cases the two don’t mix well. Whether it’s court cases that attempt to decide the truth of a scientific dispute, or the use of fingerprints, DNA, or statistics by the prosecution in a murder case, a lot can go wrong - and there’s a lot at stake.
Inspired by the recent discussion, or perhaps lack of discussion, around [a criminal case nobody in the UK can talk about for legal reasons], Tom and Stuart spend this episode looking into what happens when science meets the law.
Our favourite online magazine is Works in Progress - so it’s particularly pleasing that they’re the sponsors of The Studies Show. Works in Progress publish in-depth essays on underrated ideas to improve the world, covering the history and future of science and technology. Go to worksinprogress.co to read their entire archive for free.
Show notes
* UK man arrested for airport-related joke (2010); UK man arrested and punished (narrowly avoiding prison) for saying “burn auld fella, buuuuurn” upon the death of “Captain Tom” (2022)
* Simon Singh successfully sued by chiropractors (but then successfully appeals; 2010)
* Paper on the Italian criminal cases that helped fuel the anti-vaccine movement
* Jim Carrey campaigns against vaccines
* Tom’s 2018 New Scientist article on glyphosate and cancer
* 1995 article on the “phantom risks” of breast implants
* Helen Joyce on the Sally Clark case
* Tom’s 2024 Unherd article on “the dangers of trial by statistics”
* 2022 Royal Statistical Society report on the same topic
* How Bayes-savvy statisticians helped overturn Lucia de Berk’s conviction
* Gerd Gigerenzer on OJ Simpson
* 2022 philosophy paper on the issues with forensic science
* 2016 White House report on the gaps in forensic science
* Dror & Hampikian (2011) study on bias in DNA interpretation
* 2009 “Texas sharpshooter” paper on the rarity (or not) of DNA matches
* Useful 2023 review of human factors research in forensic science
* Interviews with 150 forensic examiners on potential biases in their work
Credits
The Studies Show is produced by Julian Mayers at Yada Yada Productions.

889 Listeners

2,671 Listeners

5,429 Listeners

2,424 Listeners

341 Listeners

590 Listeners

905 Listeners

3,814 Listeners

491 Listeners

957 Listeners

132 Listeners

213 Listeners

322 Listeners

114 Listeners

57 Listeners