[SoftTalker]

When I read stories like this I always think of Norm Macdonald's bit where he said if he were a juror he would not vote to convict a person on the basis of DNA evidence. He said, basically, "I don't know anything about DNA, how am I supposed to convict someone based on what I'm told about it?"

Basically calls into question the whole concept of "expert" witnesses. If a prosecutor cannot explain the evidence to a jury of peers, then he hasn't made an effective case.