Conviction by mathematical error?

It is inconceivable that a medical practitioner, without
qualifications and training in Statistics, could be allowed to quote as
'expert' evidence to a Court of Law statistical probability unless he/she
is quoting detailed and peer reviewed conclusions of a qualified
statistician. I am quite sure the spirit, if not the letter, of the law
requires this.

In addition to this obvious 'travesty of justice', which appears to
be all too common witness responses above, we are still experiencing the
slow and deliberate torture of often bereaved parents who are brought
before the courts accused of murderous child abuse where the possible
cause of 'iatrogenic abuse' due to vaccination ADRs is avoided in medical
testimony as the medical community appear to remain in total denial of
this effect.

John H.

I have no competing interests other than a wish to see justice done
in this country. I have appeared as an 'expert witness' many times and
have prepared and executed case files for courts in which expert witnesses
were required; I would never have entertained one who did not have
relevant qualifications or experience in the particular field as I would
class such evidence as his/her opinion.