Dr. Itiel Dror is well known for his academic work as it relates to theoretical issues underlying human performance and cognition. His research examines the information processing involved in perception, judgment and decision-making. Much of his work has focused on different disciplines in forensic science and has helped to reshape the way forensic practitioners think about the way they perform their work. As a returning guest to Forensics Talks, we will examine some of Dr. Dror's more recent work into Forensic Pathology where contextual bias appears to play a significant role in the outcome of postmortem examinations and cause of death determinations.
The first ever study of bias in forensic pathology, along with 22 Letters-to-the-Editor: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1556-4029.14697
The 2nd paper/study published about forensic pathology bias, showing that contextual information *overrides* the medical data: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X22000705
Originally aired on: March 16, 2023
Dr. Itiel Dror is well known for his academic work as it relates to theoretical issues underlying human performance and cognition. His research examines the information processing involved in perception, judgment and decision-making. Much of his work has focused on different disciplines in forensic science and has helped to reshape the way forensic practitioners think about the way they perform their work. As a returning guest to Forensics Talks, we will examine some of Dr. Dror's more recent work into Forensic Pathology where contextual bias appears to play a significant role in the outcome of postmortem examinations and cause of death determinations.
The first ever study of bias in forensic pathology, along with 22 Letters-to-the-Editor: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1556-4029.14697
The 2nd paper/study published about forensic pathology bias, showing that contextual information *overrides* the medical data: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X22000705
Originally aired on: March 16, 2023
00;00;27;26 - 00;00;55;16
Eugene
Hi everyone, it’s Eugene Liscio here and welcome to Forensics Talks. This is episode 81 and my guest today is Dr. Itiel Dror. We're going to be talking about bias in forensic pathology. And he is lead or principal consultant at Cognitive Consultants International in the UK. He's an honorary senior researcher in the Center of Forensic Sciences University College London.
00;00;55;17 - 00;01;23;05
Eugene
I believe he recently left the college to work on his own and he's had a number of publications, research grants, a whole number of different things. I don't want to spend a lot on his background because we did this already. He has the distinction of being the first speaker or guest on forensics talks who shown up twice. So he was originally an episode for and we went back through some of his background in history and how he got involved.
00;01;23;06 - 00;01;39;24
Eugene
So, if you want to go and have a look at that, you can. It's episode four. I'll post the link in the chat window in just a second. Now, today, we're going to be talking about forensic pathology and how bias and decision making is important. So let me bring him in here and there he is. Hey, Itiel, how are you?
00;01;40;09 - 00;01;42;29
Itiel
Right. Good. Thank you for having me again.
00;01;43;11 - 00;02;04;21
Eugene
Yes. You're the first speaker that I've had twice. So, we're on we're on episode 81. And you were originally on episode four. That was quite some time ago. But I thank you very much for being here. I want to ask you not so much about your background because we covered that already, but I want to ask you about, you know, from two years ago sort of where we were, it was 2020.
00;02;04;21 - 00;02;09;14
Eugene
So, what happened since 2020 where you were and where are you today?
00;02;09;24 - 00;02;15;11
Itiel
Hmm. I don't even know where to start. So, what do you want me to tell you? What I have been doing for the last. Oh, just.
00;02;15;18 - 00;02;23;25
Eugene
Yeah, well, what's been going on the past few years? I realize it was during COVID, so it's a mystery to a lot of people what happened during that time. But I'm sure I know you've been busy.
00;02;24;13 - 00;02;52;23
Itiel
Yeah, I've been very busy doing research. A lot of training in the for anything domain, but in the medical domain, innovation and other domains, including doing well in branding and marketing and a whole range of domains that it seems like a huge range of things that I'm doing. But actually it's all underpinned into cognitive neuroscience. How do people make decisions?
00;02;53;00 - 00;02;58;26
Itiel
When do people make a decision based on the data and when are they biased in their decision making?
00;02;58;28 - 00;03;14;08
Eugene
And I know you well, I know you've been traveling too. So even during COVID, I think you've had a lot of requests, I guess, both remotely to do teaching and training. And I believe not too long ago you were even in Toronto, not too far from where I am. So, have you been? I guess it's picked up now, has it?
00;03;15;10 - 00;03;45;04
Itiel
And I've been in Toronto. Yeah. And next week I'm in Boston and next month in California. But the training is not my day job. I'm not. That's not what I do. I always look, I'm. I'm a scientist, a cognitive scientist interested in understanding how the brain processes information and cognitive architecture. And I study, explore decision making when smart people do stupid things, hard walk and conflict and motivated.
00;03;45;04 - 00;04;01;03
Itiel
We're not talking about education and basically the MLA that we talk about implicit bias and it applies to the world. So from time to time I may limit myself. I do training to bring it to the community to try to make a change.
00;04;01;22 - 00;04;24;26
Eugene
Well, we're going to be I kind of want to jump right into it because I think there's quite a lot to talk about. But I do want to talk or give people a little bit of grounding in some of the work that you've done, which is going to be applicable to the pathology research. And the first thing is, I remember early on like 2010, you know, you're talking about sequential unmasking, and then there was a progression to linear sequential unmasking.
00;04;24;26 - 00;04;37;21
Eugene
And now we're at a point where linear sequential unmasking expanded. And I'm just wondering about the progression there over the years and how it has evolved for you. Can you comment a little bit on that very briefly?
00;04;37;21 - 00;05;27;21
Itiel
A sequential unmasking started some time ago specifically for DNA and then it was expanded not only for DNA, but also two others for energy domain fingerprints, firearm handwriting and now it's been expanded not only to deal with viruses, sequential unmasking and linear sequential unmasking, focused on minimizing bias. And now it's expanded to improve for, I think, decision making in general to avoid noise and to optimize decisions and not only about the bias, just a generally a very methodology to increase the reliability of form decision making in general, including bias, but not only bias.
00;05;28;01 - 00;05;37;12
Eugene
Okay. So, the expanded is much more applicable into most things in general where there's some limitations. Maybe if you just if you're just talking about sequential unmasking.
00;05;38;08 - 00;06;08;19
Itiel
Yes, it expanded to deal with other aspects of decision making, not only biased or minimized noise, for example, and it's been adopted in the medical domain and other domains have adopted linear, sequential and masking expand into looking at the right order of information. For example, there's a new paper out in dermatology where they look at microscopic slides to fight cancer, but they used to get the context before they look at the slide.
00;06;09;00 - 00;06;20;14
Itiel
So now in your paper with say, No, no, no, you need to look at the slides first and then get the context. So this is applied now to different domains to improve decision making.
00;06;21;01 - 00;06;36;10
Eugene
Yeah, there was something I believe in. One of the papers that you talk about is that the order in which the information is presented is important because and there's an example that's a graphic you have in one of your papers where you have an A and then a B that looks like a number of 13 and then 14.
00;06;36;19 - 00;06;41;04
Eugene
And you say something about the way you read it will influence what you're actually seeing in the middle.
00;06;41;28 - 00;07;02;20
Itiel
The linear, sequential and masking expanded. So two things, A, don't be exposed to task, irrelevant information that can bias you if it's irrelevant and you don't need it. But the information that you need that is relevant, the order in which you see it is very, very critical. And again, we can spend the whole hour long you on this.
00;07;02;20 - 00;07;37;05
Itiel
But basically, the first piece of information, not only your memory better, but it generates ideas, it generates hypotheses and influencing how you interpret, how you allocate the patient to subsequent information. So if you get the same information in a different order, your initial, different conclusion, and this has been shown in many, many different domains and we say it's important to sit in the correct order and we provide criteria how to optimize the order in terms of relevance and objectivity and all the details.
00;07;37;05 - 00;07;41;27
Itiel
You know, on my website, the paper is freely accessible for people who are interested.
00;07;42;23 - 00;08;09;12
Eugene
There was an interesting quote that I know that is in one of your paper. I think it's in the linear, sequential amassing expanded paper where we talk about experience and that sometimes somebody who has more years or more experience is worse off or they're more influenced by the context or they have more issues than somebody who has an or somebody who is a non expert.
00;08;09;12 - 00;08;10;09
Eugene
Can you comment on that?
00;08;10;29 - 00;08;42;08
Itiel
Yes. Many experts along me believe that because they have a lot of experience, they're immune from bias. It's one of the fallacies Fitzpatrick said about expert bias and one is expert immunity. The more expert you are, the better you are, and its expertise is great. However, it makes you in many ways more susceptible to bias because you have more prior experience, and you chunk information together and you allocate attention differently.
00;08;42;08 - 00;09;08;00
Itiel
And. And how is that cognitive brainpower? I know I spent two, three days training on it. You're asking me 20 seconds to explain. But basically, the experience is excellent and gives you a lot. But when it comes to bias, it doesn't in your in your in your fact, make you even more biased. And in a number of articles, specifically in forensic science, showing that experts are susceptible to bias and omission.
00;09;08;08 - 00;09;18;21
Itiel
And some people say that novices are better than experts when he talks about bias. And again, we can spend the whole hour on that.
00;09;19;00 - 00;09;36;20
Eugene
Right. Right. Well, you mentioned some of the some of the sources of bias. And I want to bring something up here. And this is from the this is from the paper. I believe this one is the linear. Let me go back here. I can tell you exactly which one. It's the one in pathology which we're going to be talking about soon.
00;09;37;00 - 00;09;45;22
Eugene
But originally this was from another paper. However, can you just explain this figure one here? We're talking about the different levels of bias and then you categorize them as well.
00;09;46;16 - 00;10;24;15
Itiel
Yeah. So this hierarchy provides eight sources of bias and the important point is that bias doesn't only impact your interpretation and judgment, but it also determines what the data are. And this paper, the only general paper that goes into a lot of detail, was published in analytical chemistry. So, I went to analytical chemistry. What can be more objective and scientific and analytical chemistry, making the point that the different sources of bias not only impact your interpretation, but what the data are.
00;10;24;15 - 00;10;59;02
Itiel
Because, for example, it's how you sample information and your testing strategy or when to stop. Also, the eight levels and different sources of bias are important not only for academic reason, but because each one have a different countermeasure. How you minimize the bias defense waste coming from and the eight levels. Again, very briefly, you're taking our analysis in 2 minutes, but then divided into state categories, the first category of sources of bias relate to the specific case at hand.
00;10;59;02 - 00;11;27;26
Itiel
In this case, something about this case is bias and you the second category has got nothing to do with a specific case. It's a specific expert doing the something about ideology experience where she's walking organization of fact. It's not about the specific case, but it's something about the examiner and categories. She has nothing to do with the case, the specific case or the specific examiner.
00;11;28;03 - 00;11;34;13
Itiel
It's part of human nature, regardless of the case, regardless of the person. You have things that affect all of us.
00;11;34;25 - 00;12;00;21
Eugene
Okay. A couple of weeks ago, I did an interview with Dr. Richard Shepherd from the UK, and he's a pathologist, forensic pathologist, and he's been working there for decades. And he's done like over 23,000 autopsies and worked on mass disasters and all kinds of things. And in reading, he has a couple of books and in reading his books, it's really interesting to me that oftentimes they they're always pulling information from the police.
00;12;01;05 - 00;12;23;13
Eugene
And I would say that in the past, forensic pathologists and I mean this with all due respect and, but they've also been given a free pass, and that's because they're highly respected. And, you know, the type of work that they're doing is really important. And so when they say something sometimes in areas that they may not even be well trained in, you know, people just believe them.
00;12;23;24 - 00;12;35;07
Eugene
And so, but the topic of bias came up. And I think in fairness, he you know, he did say that this was it was an interesting topic for him as well. But I want to ask.
00;12;35;07 - 00;12;43;21
Itiel
Though, when you say interesting, it's not what you use it in North America. I think this thing means something different. But yeah, I.
00;12;43;21 - 00;13;04;18
Eugene
Mean, I mean, in the North American sense that it he meant it in a in a fair and sincere manner. What I want to ask you is, is there something about forensic pathologists or something about the work that they do that makes them different to latent print examiners or bloodstain pattern or other disciplines in forensic science?
00;13;05;10 - 00;13;39;13
Itiel
Okay, so it's a complicated question, and let's deal with it systematically. First of all, a big difference is in the power they have. Forensic pathologists have a huge amount of power. They going to fingerprint examiners or handwriting or firearm or blood pattern analysis that a crime committed. And they're part of the investigation into the car before the pathologist, for example, gets a body of a child and determined that it's an accident or at least a homicide or an ad or disease suicide or this is homicide.
00;13;39;21 - 00;14;05;24
Itiel
And if they say about the child that it's an accident or the adult, that it's suicide, that's the end of it. That's closed. But if they say it's on the side of a child or of an outlaw, then there's a whole police investigation. So now our first award evolved and no one has really looked and examined the possibility of bias impacting forensic pathologists.
00;14;05;25 - 00;14;34;12
Itiel
Now they're on their front in that they say you're different in the sense that they do the work of forensic pathology. They need context in contrast to a fingerprint examiner or firearm on the meeting with context or firearm examiner. You know, they're comparing to call causation the tracing or handwriting examiners looking in the signature or they can print, you know, comparing different finger marks and forensic pathologists they need.
00;14;34;12 - 00;14;58;09
Itiel
And I acknowledge that they need a context to do their work, but they're not unique in that there are other forensic domains. For example, CSI crime scene investigator, when they come to a crime scene, they need context. They can't just come to a crime scene without context. The same thing with digital forensics. You can't just give them a hard drive without context or they're looking for the same things we saw when they got County.
00;14;58;09 - 00;15;22;01
Itiel
You can't give them a million that they need to know about accounting fraud or digital Forensic or CSI. They need context to look at another thing that they say is unique but is not unique to them is in contrast to fingerprint and other in the examination that you mention what they do source attribution. Do they match or don't match?
00;15;22;10 - 00;15;47;16
Itiel
Pathologist also talk about the activity level and then the person commits suicide or homicide. What happens? But that's true to other forensic domains. For example, blood outcome analysis is also a conclusion of activity. The person you know was wounded, the blood spatter, if left a gunshot or a night or night of stabbing and so on. So if you're not, you're not in there.
00;15;48;06 - 00;16;16;17
Itiel
The third thing that they say, which is surprising, especially when we talk about bias, they say we're medical doctors. I walk a lot in the medical domain in Harris and doctors are biased. The last thing you want to say, I'm not biased because I'm a medical doctor, because the medical domain acknowledges a bias. They treat women defined they the racist black people are going to be less diagnosed and treated differently than white people.
00;16;16;17 - 00;16;53;11
Itiel
You know, in terms of pain and other diseases. Oh, for example, if you're a young lady in adolescence, Girl goes to the emergency room and complains about abdominal pain, he will be treated different if he's black or white. If you're African American, they're going to do more death for sexual violence committed disease, take a sexual history and do it pregnancy test compared to white adolescence girl coming in with the same complaint and Obama the pain and I can talk to you endlessly on racism and biases in medical doctors.
00;16;53;17 - 00;17;31;28
Itiel
So, the fact that a medical doctor doesn't imply that they're not biased. On the contrary, the medical domain doesn't deny that there exist biases and they see them in medical diagnosis and treatment in the United States, Canada, the UK, all over the world. So I think forensic pathology has some unique characteristics that they mentioned. They need context, medical doctors, they do activity level, but that doesn't make them unique and doesn't immune them from making mistakes from time to time, honest mistakes and being biased.
00;17;32;18 - 00;17;55;03
Eugene
Okay. Well, let's I want to get into the research. We're deep into the pathology now and let's talk about the first paper. So, it's cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions. This one was 2021st February 2021 when it was published. And can you just give us the set up for you? Just the design of the experiment and how you set this up?
00;17;55;21 - 00;18;43;27
Itiel
Okay. So, this paper was published in Journal of Forensic Science, and it's first of all, it's very important to answer the first article, the first paper ever to look at bias in forensic pathology to open this Pandora's box. And the paper has two parts. Part number one is looking at death certificates. We were able to obtain over 200,000 death certificates in the United States, and we looked at the death certificates of children under the age of six and compared white kids to black kids and saw that black kids are going to have relative to white kids much more on the death certificate, same homicide, whereas white children were going to have much more same actually
00;18;43;27 - 00;19;18;03
Itiel
than other than homicide. So, these are allegations. However, each one is different. And as we clearly seen, that breakpoint, right, wants people to read the paper. Please read the paper. It's free access. You can read it. It's on my web page. And as a forensic science, we clearly say it may be that black children are murdered more than white kids, but it's very dangerous because that allows what we call and base rate bias, because that could be in the past or now.
00;19;18;21 - 00;19;50;20
Itiel
And the pathologists again and again are used to having black children more determine their homicide life and then have accidents. And this may change maybe because of changing education and economy, that once black children will grow more than white kids. Now it's not like this anymore, but the cognitive expectation is going to increase that. Now they have a bias to continuing, even though their data change could already have this mindset based on their experience.
00;19;50;27 - 00;20;18;24
Itiel
But that's one of a paper or two of the paper. We wanted to complement the live case. Walk with an experiment where we can give the same case to different paper giving the death certificates advantage. It's really useful, but each one is different. So what we did is we did an experiment wanting to see if contextual information can determine the manner of a death.
00;20;18;25 - 00;20;43;02
Itiel
So they took a case of a young toddler, our highest in the hospital, and died in a short time, a short time later. And in their first study, we wanted to see a couple of variables. It doesn't matter which one it was. We put a number, a couple of variables. So in one case the child was white and brought to the hospital by the grandmother.
00;20;43;15 - 00;21;07;24
Itiel
The other time the child was black and black by the mother's boyfriend. But the medical information, the story is exactly identical, all else being equal except the race of the baby and who brought him to the hospital. And we were very surprised to see you can put the graph if you want on the paper. Just unbelievable data, striking data.
00;21;08;03 - 00;21;13;14
Itiel
And I think it's figure to go down in the article.
00;21;14;07 - 00;21;15;12
Eugene
I just get us to hear.
00;21;17;05 - 00;21;38;24
Itiel
That on the. Yeah. So if you look at the bar at the bottom, the top one is the death certificate, the bottom on the figure. You can see if the child is waiting by the grandmother. They would say accidental way, way more than if it's a black in black by a very grand error by the mother's boyfriend on the right.
00;21;38;24 - 00;22;04;29
Itiel
And you see homicide that much, much more. If a kid is black and black by the mother's boyfriend, a huge impact on information that is contextually that is not medical. So given the same medical information, identical case, they're going to say homicide or accident based on those circumstances. And you can understand the huge impact when you have a dead child.
00;22;05;08 - 00;22;25;20
Itiel
When the pathologist said it's an accident, they believe they hit the head on the table or say, no, that's not possible. They see the homicide and they do. It's based only on the race of the baby or who brought the baby to the hospital almost right. The second part of the study that was published.
00;22;25;24 - 00;22;47;26
Eugene
Okay. So, the first part, you're analyzing the data of existing records. And to be clear, you don't know the ground truth. You don't know exactly what happened, but you are stating that there's a there's a difference in the data. There's a clear difference in the data. And I think in the paper it says we must be careful in drawing conclusions about bias from these archival data, especially given that the ground truth of how these children actually died is unknown.
00;22;48;06 - 00;23;06;13
Eugene
And as you stated, it could be possible that black children die from homicide more often than white children. So, we don't know. But it was interesting that you looked at the data. And then on the second part, what you're saying is that you had I believe you had 133 people, examiners look at this and I.
00;23;06;13 - 00;23;08;15
Itiel
Think there are 156 of them.
00;23;08;18 - 00;23;24;00
Eugene
Maybe I do, right? Yeah, maybe it was more. But in this case, you're saying that when all you did was you changed the context, you changed the who was bringing the baby there and also the race. Like you're saying that you change the race now, the race of the baby.
00;23;24;20 - 00;23;47;03
Itiel
You know, the use of the baby, the child, the toddler. And both of them are nonmedical information. No, we didn't specify the race from the caregiver, but I think one can assume implicitly that the grandmother of a white kid is probably white, and the mother's boyfriend of a black kid is more probably black. But we didn't state that explicitly.
00;23;47;08 - 00;23;55;22
Itiel
But we did explicitly state that race of the baby and hold the caregiver, both of them contextual, medical, irrelevant information.
00;23;56;07 - 00;24;24;11
Eugene
Okay, Now I have to state this, but in the paper, when you look at it, I don't think I've seen a paper with so many responses and letters. And back to the editor about this particular paper. So, there's obviously some there's some controversy or it upsets some people. And I'm just wondering, can you talk about some of the complaints that were here, I mean, in some maybe whatever, or were there any fair complaints?
00;24;24;11 - 00;24;29;08
Eugene
Were there any good complaints? And let's talk about some of the that maybe some of the complaints that that troubles you.
00;24;30;04 - 00;24;55;09
Itiel
After noticing there were some complaints in an understatement. So, these are a whole bunch of letters to the editor. That editor himself wrote a letter to the editor saying that it's never happened so much conventional forensic science and dogs, how unprofessional animals are. Some of the letters have a not in a building, a professional. This goes beyond the letters to the editor.
00;24;55;09 - 00;25;18;07
Itiel
There were complaints and complaints filed, including complaints to the Journal and the publisher trying to withdraw the paper and including personal nasty complaints against me to the university. And they filed a complaint and it dismissed and they filed the complaint elsewhere again and again and again. So, they were very upset, very emotional. I hope that now they're a bit over the weekend.
00;25;18;07 - 00;25;43;01
Itiel
One can enter a professional discourse now, I guess was a shocker. No one had ever researched it and published, and they responded emotionally. I asked people to weigh the letters and the article. In the article we say time and time again they had a first article, the first study to look at bias in forensic pathology. More studies are needed.
00;25;43;06 - 00;26;15;09
Itiel
We cannot say if the bias was because of poor blood drive to the hospital or the race or both, and we are very, very carefully stating our results. Nevertheless, you they were all very upset. I think you were an example. The paper was reviewed by three of yours. We examine the statistics, and we see X, no problem. So, they wrote a complained to Jeff Air, including everything you can think of, including that the statistics is wrong.
00;26;15;16 - 00;26;45;27
Itiel
And Jeff asked, decided to send it to an additional, if you will, or the statistician. And they do say the statistics is fine. And then they complained to my university about the statistics. And when I say nasty, at least say to the complaint. We think that Dr. Lowe's statistical analysis may be mistaken. No, they say the mistakes are statistical, but they're an embarrassment even to a junior researcher and so on and so on.
00;26;45;27 - 00;27;16;00
Itiel
Of course, they checked it and again checked and you know how now somebody complains and it was not strong when it, you know, three four complained by the professional body name the National Association of Medical Examiners filed this complaint against me to the university, to the Journal, and all of which was investigated. They complained about the statistics. They complained about the subject, about ethical approval, about their interpretation, about the data, anything they could complain to throw, anything.
00;27;16;00 - 00;27;36;29
Itiel
Maybe something would stick to the water. And if it doesn't stick to the water in one complained, let's take your complaint and do it again somewhere. I want to say that even though this has been quite nasty and unpleasant to me and my author, that they should get their perspective. You know, medical doctor recommends. The experts don't like to be criticized.
00;27;36;29 - 00;28;03;16
Itiel
If you go back, you know, to the 19th century and you go to Louis Pasteur connecting John for an infection and in fact, before Louis Pasteur, Doctor Holmes and Semmelweis in Vienna, when suddenly there was a huge number of deaths in the maternity ward, 40%. And they say you need to wash your hands because your infections of contamination, the doctors were not very happy and they're not very happy.
00;28;03;16 - 00;28;37;06
Itiel
You know, Dr. Stanley from Vienna, they put him in a mental institute. They lock him up, put him in a dark room and beat the shit out of him. And he died a few weeks later. So, what's happened to me is not that bad, but it's not a good scientific practice to go personally against a researcher. And I have to say, the resort is where the new people in left submitted a paper and in all my papers I collaborate with forensic pathologists in the paper.
00;28;37;06 - 00;29;12;00
Itiel
We had the couple of forensic pathologists doing the research, contributing to the writing, the experimental design, and some of them do not want to be all souls, even though they deserve because they're afraid of retaliation from the forensic pathology community. That is not a scientific atmosphere. I'm having debate. We cannot disagree, can are discussed. But then it's not to be intimidation and going personally against the researcher, especially what you're talking about, the more important domain, more innocent people can go to jail.
00;29;12;07 - 00;29;37;08
Itiel
And most are lost and go flee both ways. We need to try to engage in that. So, there was a huge, huge uproar, big arguments. It's very emotional and how to have a discourse on that. And that's what happened in the first article. And I again ask people to read the letters, see what they complain and see the language in their emotion and see the response.
00;29;37;08 - 00;29;43;27
Itiel
And you can decide for yourself who is writing and who is emotional on all of this.
00;29;44;10 - 00;30;01;11
Eugene
Yeah, I had to look at I mean, I read through some of them. So it's very clear they're spirited, to say the least, in some of the letters. But, I mean, you know, whenever somebody does a review of a paper and sometimes, you know, with some of the publications I have, you get stuff back. And I know this happens with students sometimes do.
00;30;01;11 - 00;30;25;17
Eugene
And I guess I've done enough that I've learned that peer review is beneficial, right? So sometimes you can't take it personally, you know, when they give you good criticism. So. Well, let me just ask you on a couple of points. Like, for example, one point was they mentioned that the fact that they suggest that the relationship between the child and the adult or the caretaker was medically relevant.
00;30;25;29 - 00;30;32;16
Eugene
And so, I'm not sure if I agree, but what's your comment on that? Should it be medically relevant?
00;30;32;16 - 00;31;03;03
Itiel
The three issues, the question that you're asking, should a forensic pathology take into account to determine if a child died as a result of accident and homicide or walking to the hospital? So, at point number one, it's a discussion that needs to be had. Is that legitimate or not legitimate to take into account? I think it's totally illegitimated and unacceptable because the same thing you can say what neighborhood they live in.
00;31;03;03 - 00;31;26;23
Itiel
If they live in an affluent neighborhood, then you think it's contextually relevant that they live in a bad neighborhood. I think they should not be taken into account, but it's an important discussion. And the fact that they believe it is astonishing that this is relevant. But it's a good discussion to have. Number two, we want transparency. This is what we call for transparency.
00;31;26;29 - 00;31;52;11
Itiel
So, if the forensic pathology community determines which I disagree, that it's relevant when the medical information they don't, they can. Same autopsy, same ward, same everything. They have a dead baby and if a baby was brought to the hospital by the grandmother, they say it's an accident and it's the same exact baby with the same medical. She was born after the hospital by the mother's boyfriend.
00;31;52;11 - 00;32;12;19
Itiel
They say, no, it's not an accident. This is a homicide based on their whole walking to the hospital, which I think is wrong. But they keep saying they do it. I want transparency. I wanted to write it in the medical report. All else being equal, I decided if the same baby was brought to the hospital by their grandmother, I would face homicide.
00;32;12;29 - 00;32;32;01
Itiel
The problem with that, they don't do it and there's no transparency and then they go back and misinterpret the medical finding for homicide because the whole going to the hospital. So, this is a good discussion to have. What is relevant, what is not relevant, and to have transparency about that.
00;32;32;09 - 00;32;44;06
Eugene
Okay. And then what about the comment about that? The focus was on race for them. The focus being on race was a problem. So, the fact that you had a choice based on race.
00;32;45;12 - 00;33;12;10
Itiel
For the race was not the focus. That's what they found it to the contrary. See, this is such a sensitive topic. That's what got them all upset. Read the paper. Clearly, it's not focused on race. And it said that the decision may not be related to waste based on other stuff like that kind of give up, even though between you and I implicitly that Kerry gave, it was probably white or black implicitly.
00;33;12;10 - 00;33;39;29
Itiel
But in the paper, we do not say there. So, the emphasis was not on race, but enough people are basing that theme and they got in. It's not on race but they said medical doctor unknown and acknowledged in this paper after the paper we cite some of them in the pathology and with many other articles in other people showing clear racial bias in medical treatment, in medical diagnosis.
00;33;40;05 - 00;34;05;18
Itiel
So, if they are medical and that's part of medical doctors, part of what they say so often and medical doctors are biased by race, they took a bias by race. So, what do they see that's different from the other medical doctors and the different other forensic scientists and the different from anybody else on the planet? Everyone has had those racial implicit again, implicit, I'm not calling them.
00;34;05;27 - 00;34;36;11
Itiel
And we said in the paper five times or more, we're not saying that intentionally racist. We say that they're in this nation implicit and other biases in the medical domain. So, again, I think it was a storm in a teacup. And I'm very sorry that the response and the response of the professional bodies, instead of cooling down their emotion and saying, let's come down and maybe we may disagree with some of the paper, but let's discuss that if you're biased.
00;34;36;18 - 00;34;58;28
Itiel
They got up in arms when I got an email from the president of the National Association of Medical Examiners. They all came. I've come to your conference. You don't have to pay me money. You don't even have to pay my travel expenses on my order. I've paid out of my own pocket. And let's have a debate that what happened with finger points again, the walks the nation.
00;34;58;28 - 00;35;17;26
Itiel
But Patricia teacher invited me. I gave a talk and then they had, you know, all the big people from the finger bands. Steve, me, girl and wants me to draw line get further out as Michelle and the whole bunch of them have the panel disagreeing with me for debate. That's great. That's what we're doing science for one day.
00;35;17;26 - 00;35;46;11
Itiel
Authorities have not allowed that and that is a pity. I don't want to say that it's not all of them. For example, just to give an example from the United States, Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences, one of the biggest autopsy centers in the United States, they do a like 5000 autopsies. They invited me over and I spent two days there giving a workshop and having a debate with for the pathologist on this issue.
00;35;46;20 - 00;35;57;28
Itiel
So, they're all changeless and there are more things hopefully moving on. And then course, it's not all so bad, but there are some good stuffs that I wanted to mention. Also.
00;35;57;28 - 00;36;09;05
Eugene
Okay. I want to move on to the next paper, but were you already starting the second paper already at the same time, or did you finish this one and said, hey, we need to do something else here? After the reaction.
00;36;09;19 - 00;36;39;27
Itiel
The data of the second paper I believe we collected before we published the article because I don't think they will be very eager to participate in studies on forensic pathology decision making, even though my name is usually not mentioned that the forensic pathologist that I collaborate includes the data. So, we had the data. But the forensic aside, we collaborated with me on the second article.
00;36;40;04 - 00;37;07;05
Itiel
Again, they were very, very aware. It took us going back and forth. It could be painful because obviously in forensic science, international synergy, again, it's open access, It's on my web page, on the Journal Web page, and you had the forensic pathologist who collaborated really well on the forensic pathology community response and toning it down and saying, let's tone it down, not because it's inchoate.
00;37;07;09 - 00;37;29;11
Itiel
So, they will not get upset. So, it took a lot a lot of going back and forth, every ward, every comma before we even submitted it and got the reviews, wanted changes, of course, to get it published. And as I told you, the third paper, the pathologists at least one of them, doesn't want to be even an author because they're afraid of the retaliation.
00;37;29;17 - 00;37;46;24
Itiel
So, they sent a second paper. The data was collected before the first paper with already, but it took a year, almost two years to agree how to present it in a way that everyone of author felt more or less comfortable.
00;37;47;09 - 00;38;14;20
Eugene
Okay, well, let's talk about this, this, this, the study here and the experimental design. You can expand on this, but basically, as I understand it, you have four different cases, and the variables are these different cases. They're the order of the presentation and how you give the information to the examiner. So, for example, you might be able to give the crime scene photos and things like or the autopsy photos.
00;38;14;25 - 00;38;19;16
Eugene
And then you give the context of what happened and sometimes you reversed it. Right.
00;38;20;21 - 00;38;46;24
Itiel
Well, there are two issues in this paper. So, the paper, they were a dead body, a single gunshot wound. And the question of the homicide or suicide, the medical information in identical. And we change the context. So, if you go to table number five, it summarizes the data nicely. Yeah. Okay. So, this table five, perfect. That's still making with Apple X.
00;38;46;26 - 00;39;13;29
Itiel
And so here you see contextual information and a final decision. So, the context can be assigned to homicide, and the final decision can be suicide or homicide. And again, looking at data, it's like a look, you know, you can dream for such beautiful data are really, really clear. So, when the decision, the context is suicide, they decide suicide 153 times.
00;39;14;07 - 00;39;46;19
Itiel
But the same medical information, the context is the homicide, only 10%. You get the exact opposite when they do decide to homicide, when the context of the homicide, it's 181. But when its suicide, only 25. So that's number one. Striking strong evidence. What is interesting here, there were two stages. They got the medical information; they made a decision and then they got the context.
00;39;47;06 - 00;40;20;18
Itiel
So, they made a medical decision and then they could the context of suicide or context of a homicide. What happens when they initially decide to homicide based on their medical information and then they get the context of suicide? Alternatively, based on the medical information, they decide suicide and then they get to the context of homicide. And what was very astonishing is if the contextual information, if they find most of them reversed the decision, the context override.
00;40;20;25 - 00;40;40;03
Itiel
So, once they make the decision of the medical information that gives a context in the context doesn't fit the medical, they will change the medical. The context is so powerful that they will override the medical decision based on context. Again, made the paper, it's available and you can see all the details in the paper.
00;40;40;13 - 00;40;50;26
Eugene
So, on this particular one, the is again, you would recommend that the linear sequential and masking expanded could assist with the decision making process.
00;40;51;26 - 00;41;26;29
Itiel
It assists with the decision-making process and give it transparency. I'm not against I have a problem, but I don't feel strongly against a linear sequential and masking allow this that they make a decision based on the autopsy and then they get the context, and they say the decision that is allowed, but it has to be documented. So at least is transparency to the fact find out that based on the medical information alone, the forensic pathologist decided that it's suicide.
00;41;26;29 - 00;41;52;28
Itiel
For example. And then they got certain context and then they decided, no, it's not suicide. It's almost like that is okay. But there is documentation and transparency. So, we know if the decision what components are based on medical information, what is non-medical and what is contextual. So, I want to emphasize I'm not and I say I'm not ten times and somebody would say, I said it.
00;41;53;05 - 00;42;19;26
Itiel
I'm not saying the forensic facility should not use contextual information. They should. They can, and in fact, they have to use contextual information. But I want to know the fact I know it only needs to know how the contextual information contributed to that decision. So, we have transparency and then they can understand what is medical and what is contextual information.
00;42;20;10 - 00;42;38;15
Eugene
Okay. And perhaps so, for example, if you have a situation or a scenario where somebody reverses their decision, right? So, they start with one and let's say you're just you're working in a void. You have all just the medical information. They do the autopsy, they have the photographs, they look at everything and they say, okay, I think it's homicide.
00;42;38;21 - 00;42;59;02
Eugene
And then all of a sudden, they start getting context and they start saying, oh, wait a second, okay, I think this might be suicide. Does that do that strengthen or weaken the decision? You know, does it cause some kind of problem, you know, from the medical examiner, just say, hey, well, look, you know, what should they be reporting that?
00;42;59;02 - 00;43;12;00
Eugene
Should they be saying, look, I thought at first it looked like homicide and now I think it's a suicide. Maybe, maybe that's something people feel uncomfortable with. But is that's something that is part of the requirement that needs to be disclosed.
00;43;12;00 - 00;43;43;27
Itiel
Whether they should or shouldn't or whether they feel comfortable with or uncomfortable with, whether they should or not should be uncomfortable. It's not for me to say. But if they're uncomfortable, then either don't do it or be transparent about it. I don't want them to put under the carpet. They're uncomfortable and hide it contextually based decision. And if it is medical and unintentionally misleading the court and giving the impression that their decision is medical.
00;43;43;27 - 00;44;10;25
Itiel
I'm a medical doctor and I'm a forensic pathologist. My determination, homicide and, the jurors or the judge and the police detective, they think it was a medical decision when in fact it was not a medical, because based on the medical find, the suicide, they said a suicide. But then they found that, you know, an eyewitness that said something and then they changed the decision from suicide to homicide.
00;44;11;01 - 00;44;30;23
Itiel
If they're uncomfortable, then don't do it. But they're dismissed and spend and not have the impression, intentionally or not, that the decision was purely medical. And if they feel uncomfortable and I don't know if they should or shouldn't, but that's something that needs to be disclosed and transparent to themselves and to others.
00;44;31;21 - 00;44;46;29
Eugene
So, this study, though, just so we're clear, though, they were given photographs, right. So obviously, normally they would have they would be able to examine the body and things like this. But in this in this case, they're dealing with photographs that you've set up. Correct.
00;44;47;18 - 00;45;14;07
Itiel
Not only photographs, they got photographs and other information. Remember that forensic pathologists don't have to say homicide or suicide, accidental or not, but they can say undetermined if the information we gave them is not sufficient to be confident, to say, almost died of suicide. They can always say undetermined. And in fact, in the first study, many of them said undetermined.
00;45;14;14 - 00;45;33;16
Itiel
So, they're allowed. We're not forcing them. You know, we do think cognitive science, but we have a fourth choice to have to say yes or no, match or no Mac here, it can say undetermined, inconclusive, because the information we gave them is not enough, but we gave them more than the photography picture in.
00;45;33;17 - 00;45;54;21
Eugene
The first in the first study, for example, you had two choices. They said, you know, it could be this or this. But I'm wondering, is there a way to set up something like an almost like a placebo where they don't have the choice and they're still given some information? And then you can see if they decide, you know, more homicide versus suicide in one way or the other.
00;45;55;06 - 00;46;26;00
Itiel
In the first study in the study, they will be able to decide what they decide. Normally in the United States, they have five options. When they decide the manner of death, it can be suicide, it can be homicide, it can be accident, it can be natural or undetermined. So, we gave them those five choices. That's a normal choice. And of course, if you're talking about a child, suicide is not possible.
00;46;26;17 - 00;46;47;27
Itiel
And if the trial is ahead of the table, obviously it's not natural. So, it leaves homicide accidental or undetermined. In the second study, giving the circumstances, that person had the bullet, the gunshot wound, then it's not natural. It can be suicide or homicide or undetermined.
00;46;48;05 - 00;46;49;01
Eugene
Right. Okay.
00;46;49;02 - 00;46;56;14
Itiel
Fair enough. Yeah. Well, given the five choices that they normally have when they determine the manner of death.
00;46;56;14 - 00;47;09;09
Eugene
You have a third study that is not published, but something that you're working on. And I don't know anything about it. I just know that you're working on something. So, what can you tell us about this next paper and where you're where you're moving into from paper number two?
00;47;10;11 - 00;47;37;18
Itiel
So, the third paper that is now under review, the third paper looking at bias in forensic pathology. And part of the problem with forensic pathology, they work very closely with the police and often they're even present in the autopsy, the postmortem, and they tell the pathologist what the theory, what they think happened. So, they're presented with one theory.
00;47;37;29 - 00;48;05;09
Itiel
So, in this experiment, again, a bunch of forensic pathologists, they get one theory and supplies. They almost all of them support that one theory. And then we take the same medical findings again. But instead of giving them one theory, they get two alternative series. And where there's two alternative stairways, we find two things. First of all, some of them support the other fewer.
00;48;05;21 - 00;48;32;27
Itiel
So, they don't have only the police there. We never had anything. So, some of them now do not support the police say we they support the other way. And even those who still support the police theory are less confident because we ask them to ask for confidence when they have one theory. The police, when they supported the high confidence, when they might turn up the hypothesis, even if they still support the police theory, the less confident about it.
00;48;33;15 - 00;48;49;02
Itiel
And that is the problem with not only finding authority but any domain where you have only one theory and that is what is guiding you. And again, the police are present in the autopsy and a walk with the police and then a close relationship to the police.
00;48;49;22 - 00;48;54;02
Eugene
How far along are you on that paper? Is that being written up or is it under review?
00;48;54;02 - 00;48;58;04
Itiel
It's been written up and submitted and under review as we speak.
00;48;58;18 - 00;49;16;26
Eugene
Okay. I want to ask you about something else, and that has to do with your involvement with now, is it Let me bring it up here. Is it with Maryland? It's up here. It's with the Maryland Review of Deaths in Police custody. What can you tell me about that?
00;49;18;13 - 00;49;48;22
Itiel
I can't say anything specific except what is being officially in press releases by the Maryland attorney general and governor who decided to review after the George Floyd case. Do they view death in police custody over a period of time? But there was the 1300 people who died in police custody about the specific review of the Maryland deaths in police custody.
00;49;49;02 - 00;50;26;29
Itiel
I cannot say anything, but generally speaking, when people die in police custody, the question is what the pathologists decide. And again, they can decide each accidental national homicide. And the question is there, I'm bias. If you get that dead body of someone who has been beaten up and that happened in a gang warfare or in police custody where the forensic pathologist makes the same decision or the bias when it's a gang warfare where they restrain someone and beat them up, they say they a homicide.
00;50;27;17 - 00;50;51;14
Itiel
But when the police do it, they say the person who was on drugs, they had a heart condition or undetermined and they don't call it homicide. I need to emphasize that if they say it's homicide, it doesn't mean that the police were wrong. I have been asked and I've investigated the number of police shootings that ended up with people dying and things.
00;50;51;14 - 00;51;16;16
Itiel
The police will collect any extra police data. Quick action. If you did a homicide. Homicide, you said that the person killed another person. It doesn't seem to justify it or not. But the question is, is it a bias? So, the pathologists are much more likely to say that the death or the accident went natural or undetermined when it happened in police custody?
00;51;17;06 - 00;51;50;26
Itiel
And if there is such a bias, why is it a racial bias? Because most of the people are black or drop in the police, then black people are seven times more likely to die after police constraint relative to white people. And the situation in the United States is not any better. So even the pathologist has a bias When people die in police custody, it's a nation biased or it may not be a racial bias, it may be a general for police bias, nothing related to the race of the victim.
00;51;51;00 - 00;52;14;29
Itiel
They know the police. They walk with the police. They identify the police. The police are present in the autopsy and so on. So, they have a general for police bias. And it may be not a bias at all, not racial bias and not the police price. We have to be fair to the forensic pathologist. It could be when somebody dies in police custody, they investigate more.
00;52;15;14 - 00;52;42;20
Itiel
So, if somebody, some homeless person dies, a biker gang killed a homeless person, they don't run the same amount of tests as if someone died in police custody. When somebody died in police custody are more likely to send the heart and the brain to special examiners and to do many, many more toxicological exams every day, more and more tests, you're more likely to find, you know, not if you go to the medical doctor or your health and you do more and more tests.
00;52;42;29 - 00;53;06;13
Itiel
The medical tests are so good, they're going to find something wrong with you, even if you see. So, the fact that forensic pathologists investigate death in police custody much more than other deaths because it's going to be scrutinized more and so on, then the more they investigate it, the more other things come out with the heart condition and the person was under drugs or whatever.
00;53;06;19 - 00;53;38;15
Itiel
And then more alternative possible explanations come up to the person dying. And then they say, well, we're not clear. If it's almost said, it may be because of the heart condition or the drugs that they were taking. And then they say undetermined, and then you get this very problematic consequence that when somebody died in police custody, the possibilities are much more likely to say undetermined where the same body exactly was bought, that the person didn't die in police custody, the result would be homicide.
00;53;38;20 - 00;54;02;26
Itiel
But that will not be because of racial bias or because of poor police bias. So, there are many alternative explanations, but we definitely need to look at it, especially after the George Floyd case. Right. Who knows what the pathologist would have decided if there was not a video showing the police officer putting the knee on the neck of George Floyd for 9 minutes?
00;54;02;26 - 00;54;36;24
Itiel
Right. Who knows? And people can speculate and bring their own view into that. But again, it's very emotional and that is a big problem to do science. We're talking about the emotional response. So in this Maryland investigation, I told the attorney general of Maryland, whatever you find, you're going to be criticized because if you find that the pathologist will not bias black lives matter in the family who had people die, who are totally Hennessy are going to cry and say, this is not a good review.
00;54;37;03 - 00;55;07;17
Itiel
If you find that the forensic pathologist is biased, I can imagine the forensic pathologist and the National Association of Medical Examiners come in and say they're there. And the forensic pathology and review, even the name was invited to take part in the review, and they refused. Listen, the problem with bias know how to talk on the data. Imagine being found talking about abortions, being someone, regardless of my opinion.
00;55;07;17 - 00;55;38;11
Itiel
So, you been based on or feels very strongly on pro-choice as someone who feels very strongly about pro-life and have them meet and talk to one another. Zero. So almost zero families are going to talk and convince one another. People are so strongly pro-choice or pro-life and so emotional that it's very hard to have a professional discourse. But we have to do it in forensic science and have to do it on the pathology, because it's not an ideological science.
00;55;38;11 - 00;56;02;19
Itiel
We want to make sure that guilty people go to jail and don't go free and innocent people don't go to jail. And the Maryland review is very important because it's examining for the first time what forensic pathologists do in death in police custody, which happened alone not only in Maryland, but all over the United States, in the UK and all over the world.
00;56;02;28 - 00;56;34;23
Itiel
And until recently, the forensic pathologist, I mean, obviously called to do what they want. No one looked at their biases and now they're starting to do it. And I hope they will not oppose it and walk with the cognitive scientist and with the experts to understand forensic pathology decision making, how it can be improved. Even if it's very good, it can be born with a linear, sequential, a masking or other techniques, rather than saying we all fit, we don't make mistakes.
00;56;35;05 - 00;57;00;08
Itiel
For example, in the George Floyd case, when the family wanted a second opinion on the autopsy, the National Association of Medical Examiners name initially came against it. They probably said people say, no, we don't want a second opinion, we don't need a second opinion. Outrageous. I have to retract it later. So, I think it takes a lot of courage to say we make mistakes, we do our best.
00;57;00;14 - 00;57;22;10
Itiel
We dedicated all the work in the forensic pathologist all, but they're not perfect. And the liable and susceptible to biases like other forensic experts and medical doctors. And it's time for them to be open up to understand the issue and take measures, when possible, to minimize those biases and enhance their decision making.
00;57;23;10 - 00;57;48;05
Eugene
Can you comment on the complexity of the case and maybe in your experience and maybe you're not that far ahead in this area of pathology or forensic pathology just yet, but in some of your past work with latent prints and some of these other areas, when the type of case that you're working on is clear cut, like it's very usually simpler, then they maybe people perform very well.
00;57;48;15 - 00;58;11;10
Eugene
But with medical like, for example, with George Floyd or let's say a similar case, the person had was intoxicated, they had drug, they have a medical condition. There was this kind of you know, they were had depression. They were on so many different things. When things become complicated like that, is it easier for people to tip one way or the other based on context?
00;58;12;09 - 00;58;47;23
Itiel
Absolutely. And it's not only in forensic science and medical domain. We just finished collecting data on our own hiring practices, and in every domain, when the decision is relatively easy, like it's a clear answer, then there is less clear way for bias. But every decision is more difficult when there's more discretion, more judgment, more subjectivity, then it's a big, fertile ground for bias to take it.
00;58;48;02 - 00;59;01;05
Itiel
So that's why we talk about 3 hours. You don't have to use linear, sequential unmasking in every case. In the more difficult the threshold when it's not a clear-cut case, this is where you're more susceptible to biases.
00;59;01;13 - 00;59;13;25
Eugene
Okay. I want to ask you about a couple of in the air, a couple of other areas that you may be working on. The first one, let's think pattern analysis. What can you talk about some of the work you might be doing with the bias in BPA?
00;59;13;25 - 01;00;00;13
Itiel
So, the three areas I'm working on now, one is blood bath, an analysis that I'm not only looking at the bias, I'm looking at reliability, validity, bias and error rates. I'm examining blood pattern analysis, which supposedly is super objective. It's physics, it's massive fluid dynamics. But I am looking into it to see if there is human interpretation and judgment and reliability, validity bias in our weight and blood pattern analysis, and also looking at income inclusive decisions in firearms and fingerprints in many domains with an inconclusive on the domain.
01;00;00;27 - 01;00;25;08
Itiel
And how that happened, the casework and that and how it happened in low wage study and how they calculate error with when people say inconclusive. So that's another interesting area that I'm looking at, how they calculated. And do they even include inconclusive; I think is part of the test in the narrow weight study. And there's been a number of papers on that.
01;00;25;08 - 01;00;54;26
Itiel
And I can tell you briefly to the shock and surprise of myself and many people, even though inconclusive is happened in casework, every time you talk to find the examiner, they say, oh, we are inconclusive firearms and handwriting and fingerprint. Most L.A. studies do not include inconclusive items. They don't include them, so they don't mimic casework and are totally a don't represent.
01;00;55;07 - 01;01;21;05
Itiel
And then even though they don't include inconclusive things, I think if nevertheless that examiner was inconclusive when there's no inconclusive, many of them will not calculate. It is a mistake. Some of them even calculated a quick response every time they say inconclusive, I wish I would be able to do exams. And every time I don't know the answer, I say inconclusive when they say, okay, you don't have to answer the.
01;01;21;05 - 01;01;47;16
Itiel
And that's a second domain, the inconclusive an evaluate scenario. And the third domain, if I'm not hated enough already, is judges. So, we see bias in judges. So, we published a paper about bias of judges. And that is a very problematic issue. And if you want again and we've been talking for over an hour, but we can talk, of course, that judges have a bias, and they are implicit.
01;01;47;16 - 01;02;19;25
Itiel
I'm not accusing Judge Awful. And the pathologist or forensic examiners or medical doctor of intentionally being biased and discriminatory. This is implicit bias. And judges have in place its biases. The only thing I can say, the judges, even though they're biased, they don't claim to be scientists and forensic scientist come to the court. They say we're scientists, so we have to be held to a higher standard in terms of bias than actions we take.
01;02;20;02 - 01;02;28;15
Itiel
But judges and everyone else, including myself, need to take every measure possible to minimize our biases because we all have them.
01;02;29;03 - 01;02;55;14
Eugene
Well, judges are an interesting one because like you said, they aren't scientists. So, the information that they receive is immense. It's enormous. And it's from its hearsay, it's eyewitness testimony, it's the physical facts, it's expert opinions. It's everything. So, it's the totality of everything in a case. And so, they have, I would say it's obviously a very difficult role in applying the law or making a decision on someone.
01;02;55;25 - 01;02;58;23
Eugene
And so, yeah, that's a.
01;02;58;25 - 01;03;24;18
Itiel
That's a I'm always like and you have the more you can be bias and justify your decision. So, you decide on your decision based on bias and gut feelings and then you find confirmation bias where you pay attention and give a high weight to the evidence that supports what you want to and disregard. Don't say explain away the evidence then doesn't support what you want to do anyhow.
01;03;24;25 - 01;03;41;12
Itiel
The more data you have, the more complex a case and the more you can pick and choose unintentionally that data that supports your bias. And then what you want to show data doesn't drive your conclusion is justified and it rationalize your bias decision.
01;03;42;16 - 01;03;50;12
Eugene
You know, you're going to be getting a lot more letters to the editor, so be ready for more writing.
01;03;50;12 - 01;04;05;23
Itiel
The name change doesn't come easy, and at least I hope I'm not going to end up like air with washing their hands. The doctor said, wash your hands and they lock them up. Beat them up, and they died in a mental asylum. So, I hope it will not be that bad.
01;04;05;26 - 01;04;21;10
Eugene
No, no, I don't think so. Well, look, we've been talking for some time, and I just want to put your website up here. So, for those that want to get a hold of Dr. Drew, draw CCI, dash HQ dot com, and I believe there's a contact form there. You can get a hold of him if you have any questions and.
01;04;21;13 - 01;04;28;06
Itiel
Not the questions. All the articles are all on the web page so people can avoid the data and decide for themselves.
01;04;28;17 - 01;04;45;17
Eugene
Yeah, I was seeing a lot of these. You've made open source, which is great. So, you know, you don't have to be part of the university or an institution. You can pick these off right off the Internet, which makes it available for everybody. So, it's, Oh, thank you so much for being back here. I really appreciate it. Lots of interesting.
01;04;45;17 - 01;04;46;27
Itiel
Stuff. Bring me again.
01;04;47;15 - 01;04;58;18
Eugene
Yeah, definitely. And I will probably have to have you again when you start talking about the bloodstained stuff or maybe in the future. On the judges and some of the other work that you're doing. I think it's they're.
01;04;58;19 - 01;05;03;14
Itiel
Going to put this interview on YouTube, right? So, people who haven't seen it like can see it later.
01;05;03;18 - 01;05;21;05
Eugene
It's remains there. So, people are watching now. It's going to stay there and they'll be able to watch it several times if they want. And it will also go on podcast. So, people have a lot of opportunity to want to thank everybody for the comments and everything else in the chat window. Thank you all for being here.
01;05;21;17 - 01;05;26;24
Eugene
We are going to be back in the future with more of forensic talks and I wish you all a happy Thursday. Bye.