[CharlesWayneCT]

To judge bias, you'd have to have statistics on how many times TIP looks at a case vs how many times the "find" the party innocent. If they look at hundreds of thousands of cases at random and found a thousand wrong, that's probably not bias.

If they almost always manage to find people "innocent", it's probably because the people they hire know what the outcome has to be.

Another check for bias -- see if they use the same people all the time. Then see if they tend to use experts that agree with their assessment, and replace experts that don't.

I believe that, without any real evidence, we could presume that researchers picked for their studies are picked because they have a bias toward finding fault with prosecutions, and since this organization makes it's money by finding mistakes, they have a monetary bias toward finding mistakes.

[Stone Mountain]

I believe that, without any real evidence, we could presume that researchers picked for their studies are picked because they have a bias toward finding fault with prosecutions, and since this organization makes it's money by finding mistakes, they have a monetary bias toward finding mistakes.

Not sure about this monetary bias you are talking about. TIP doesn't make money based on whether or not they were sucessful or not. Unless you are talking about them getting more donations from the public after a successful exoneration, I don't see any monetary bias.

If they almost always manage to find people "innocent", it's probably because the people they hire know what the outcome has to be.

TIP has also proved people that have proclaimed their innocence to be guilty. In fact, people try to use this fact to show that TIP doesn't work, when in fact, as you mention, it is just more evidence of their lack of bias.