So, defandants should not get the benefit of forensic pathologists testifying on their behalf, notwithstanding the over 200 people who have been exonerated by DNA?
I hope you never sit on a jury.
“Alan Colmes asked forensic pathologist Dr. Michael Baden if the Duke rape case didn’t raise issues of prosecutorial misconduct.
Baden thought it did, especially with regard to those who have been exonerated by the Innocence Project. “(The Duke rape case) allows us to talk about the general issue of prosecutorial withholding of evidence and misconduct, especially when it comes to the almost 200 people that have gotten out of jail who are innocent. Most of those cases, the prosecutors didn’t do their job correctly.” Baden referenced a case from that day’s New York Times where a defendant had been exonerated through DNA yet “the prosecutor still won’t let him out.” Baden said”
http://64.233.169.104/search?www.newshounds.us/2006/12/24/
Just because the DNA results don't prove guilt doesn't, by itself, mean that the convict is innocent.