Redirect examination of Dr. Renee Shields (2)

📄 Redirect examination of Dr. Renee Shields (2) — Thursday, June 22, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\JUN\22\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-DR-REN.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 101 of 167

◀ Re-redirect examination of Dr. Renee Shields Motion: DNA statistical evidence ▶

Witness: Dr. Renee Shields
Examiner: William Thompson
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Thursday, June 22, 1995 • Utterances: 12

A very brief redirect examination in which Thompson established that Dr. Evett — the British statistician whose work underlies Dr. Weir's likelihood ratio approach — does not advocate presenting likelihood ratios as raw numbers to juries, but instead recommends verbal descriptors like 'strong evidence' or 'extremely strong evidence.' Judge Ito interjected with his own curiosity about the alternative method.

# 1 MR. THOMPSON:

One question.

# 2 THE COURT:

Sure.

FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. THOMPSON

# 3 MR. THOMPSON:

Now, Dr. Weir said his approach was based on an article by ion Evett, who is a British statistician and forensic scientist?

# 4 DR. SHIELDS:

That's correct.

# 5 MR. THOMPSON:

Do you know whether Dr. Evett advocates the use of likelihood ratios to communicate with juries or not?

# 6 DR. SHIELDS:

He does.

# 7 MR. THOMPSON:

Does he advocate presenting likelihood ratios as numbers?

# 8 DR. SHIELDS:

No.

# 9 MR. THOMPSON:

Okay. Thank you.

# 10 THE COURT:

Well, if you're not going to do it as a number, how are you going to do it?

KEY QUOTE

# 11 DR. SHIELDS:

He uses words like "Strong evidence, extremely strong evidence, mild evidence, bad evidence."

# 12 THE COURT:

All right. Thank you. Any other witnesses, Mr. Thompson?

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (2)

Dr. Renee Shields

He uses words like 'Strong evidence, extremely strong evidence, mild evidence, bad evidence.'

Undermines the defense's DNA statistical presentation by showing even the foundational authority for the likelihood ratio method prefers plain-language communication over numerical figures for juries.

Lance A. Ito

Well, if you're not going to do it as a number, how are you going to do it?

Ito's spontaneous question reveals genuine judicial interest in the methodology debate and inadvertently drew out the key answer Thompson was building toward.

Notable Exchanges (1)

Lance A. Ito•Dr. Renee Shields

Judge Ito jumped in unprompted to ask how Evett's verbal approach works, getting a clear answer about qualitative descriptors replacing numerical likelihood ratios.

curious/clarifying

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Dr. Weir

authority undermining

Thompson used Shields to show that Evett — the very authority Weir's methodology rests on — rejects presenting likelihood ratios as numbers to juries, implicitly questioning the jury-communication choices Weir made.

Objections

None recorded

Proceeding 6520 • 12 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103