Back In Action: Discredited pediatrician Dr. Debra Esernio-Jenssen: Pennsylvania: The Lehigh Daily (Reporter Isabel Hope) reports on a podcast that investigates years of alleged child abuse misdiagnoses by LVHN (Lehigh Valley Health Network) doctors focusing on a meeting in 2023 in which "dozens of parents said local doctors had falsely accused them of abusing their children and torn their families apart. noting that manyof the speakers pointed to pediatrician, Dr. Debra Esernio-Jenssen, who at the time led Lehigh Valley Health Network’s John Van Brakle Child Advocacy Center. They said her diagnoses of child abuse — often made with little medical justification — had led to wrongful separations and trauma. - and thatNow, more than two years later, at least 27 families in Pennsylvania are suing Esernio-Jenssen and LVHN, accusing the health network and its former doctor of negligence, fraud and emotional distress."

 

ACCESS TO PODCAST:

"When the reporter Dyan Neary attended a county commissioners’ meeting in the Lehigh Valley in Pennsylvania, she watched dozens of people step up to the mic to tell harrowing stories about child abuse accusations and family separations. They all claimed that the local hospital had misdiagnosed their children as victims of abuse. Many pointed to a single pediatrician, whose alleged mistakes, they said, had shattered their lives. That meeting was in the summer of 2023; now, at least 27 families in Pennsylvania are suing the doctor, as well as the hospital where it all happened. When Neary investigated the doctor’s past, she found a history of similar complaints spanning three decades and multiple states. Her reporting examined court filings and workplace dramas from New York to Florida to Pennsylvania. And it revealed how this doctor’s controversial career paralleled the rise of a new subspecialty: child abuse pediatrics, a field devoted to detecting — and preventing — child abuse. The Preventionist charts this doctor’s path to Pennsylvania, as well as the profound damage that can result from separating parents and children; the final episode is the unvarnished story of one mother’s struggle to reunite her family after it was torn apart. Her ordeal answers the questions at the heart of child-protection work: What is the cost of a “better safe than sorry” approach? And how should doctors and caseworkers make life-altering judgments in cases where abuse isn’t clear-cut?"

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/16/podcasts/serial-productions-the-preventionist.html

----------------------------------------------------------------

PASSAGE OF THE DAY:  "*Reporter Dyan) Neary’s new podcast, The Preventionist, revisits that meeting and delves into the broader story. The series traces Esernio-Jenssen’s decades-long career across multiple states, exploring how her work — and the field of child abuse pediatrics itself — became the center of an ongoing national debate. Neary’s reporting uncovered a pattern of similar complaints stretching back 30 years, from New York to Florida to Pennsylvania. The final episode follows one mother’s fight to reunite with her children after Esernio-Jenssen’s findings led to their removal — an incident that raises difficult questions about how doctors and caseworkers make life-altering decisions when the signs of abuse are unclear."

———————————————————————————

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "The lawsuits filed last year allege that LVHN hired Esernio-Jenssen in 2014 despite being warned she had been removed from the Child Protection Team at the University of Florida for photographing a naked child who was a witness in a case. Plaintiffs accuse her of separating families, damaging reputations and refusing to retract false abuse findings even when confronted with evidence. “Families were irreparably torn apart because of these accusations and reputations permanently ruined,” one of the filings states. LVHN, which is among nearly 20 defendants listed in the class action suit, has not commented on the litigation. The network has previously defended its doctors, saying they are required by law to report suspicions of child abuse."

STORY: "Podcast investigates years of alleged child abuse misdiagnoses by LVHN doctors" by Isabel Hope, published by The Lehigh Daily, on November 1, 2025. (Isabel Hope is a journalist and website designer based in Bethlehem, PA. She graduated with a degree in journalism from The University of Alabama in 2022, where she served as News Editor of the student newspaper. Isabel has lived in the Lehigh Valley for three years and is passionate about reporting for the communities she now calls home.)

LEHIGH VALLEY, Pa. —GIST:  Reporter Dyan Neary attended a Lehigh County commissioners’ meeting in 2023 and watched as dozens of parents said local doctors had falsely accused them of abusing their children and torn their families apart.

Many of the speakers pointed to pediatrician, Dr. Debra Esernio-Jenssen, who at the time led Lehigh Valley Health Network’s John Van Brakle Child Advocacy Center. They said her diagnoses of child abuse — often made with little medical justification — had led to wrongful separations and trauma.

Now, more than two years later, at least 27 families in Pennsylvania are suing Esernio-Jenssen and LVHN, accusing the health network and its former doctor of negligence, fraud and emotional distress.

Neary’s new podcast, The Preventionist, revisits that meeting and delves into the broader story. The series traces Esernio-Jenssen’s decades-long career across multiple states, exploring how her work — and the field of child abuse pediatrics itself — became the center of an ongoing national debate.

Neary’s reporting uncovered a pattern of similar complaints stretching back 30 years, from New York to Florida to Pennsylvania. The final episode follows one mother’s fight to reunite with her children after Esernio-Jenssen’s findings led to their removal — an incident that raises difficult questions about how doctors and caseworkers make life-altering decisions when the signs of abuse are unclear.

Esernio-Jenssen, who began working part time at LVHN in fall 2023, retired from the network in March 2024. Her retirement came months after Lehigh County Controller Mark Pinsley released a report highlighting what he called a trend of child abuse misdiagnoses under her leadership.

“As Dr. Jenssen steps into retirement, it’s a pivotal moment for us to embrace change,” Pinsley said at the time. “This is an opportunity to innovate and strengthen our community’s health and safety protocols.”

Parents’ Medical Rights Group, a Lehigh Valley nonprofit formed by local families who say they were wrongfully accused of abuse, also welcomed her departure — but said it did not go far enough.

“Allowing years of widespread harm to children and families is unacceptable,” the group said in a March 2024 statement. “We encourage all those in leadership roles to stop staying silent and to start using your voice, as these children and families did, to protect our community from ever having this widespread harm happen again. No more silence.”

The lawsuits filed last year allege that LVHN hired Esernio-Jenssen in 2014 despite being warned she had been removed from the Child Protection Team at the University of Florida for photographing a naked child who was a witness in a case. Plaintiffs accuse her of separating families, damaging reputations and refusing to retract false abuse findings even when confronted with evidence.

“Families were irreparably torn apart because of these accusations and reputations permanently ruined,” one of the filings states. LVHN, which is among nearly 20 defendants listed in the class action suit, has not commented on the litigation. The network has previously defended its doctors, saying they are required by law to report suspicions of child abuse.

“At Lehigh Valley Health Network, we are guided by our mission to heal, comfort, and care for the people of our community,” spokesperson Jamie Stover said in a 2024 statement. “Early recognition of abuse can be lifesaving and our clinicians remain committed to caring for and protecting our patients.”

As of October 2025, LVHN has not responded to new requests for comment.

The Preventionist is available on major podcast platforms."

The entire story can be read at: 

https://lehighdaily.com/podcast-investigates-years-of-alleged-child-abuse-misdiagnoses-by-lvhn-doctor/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985

———————————————————————————————

FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Back in Action: Robert Roberson: Death Row; Texas: The Dallas Morning News (Breaking News Reporter Jamie Landers) up-dates us on what has happened in the courts since the 59-year-old got his third stay of execution on Oct. 9, noting that documents filed in the weeks since Robert Roberson III was granted his third stay of execution show the state is pushing back on an evidentiary hearing that could lead to the new trial his attorneys have been chasing just shy of a decade - and that The Texas attorney general’s office, however, has argued there is still enough proof of abuse to uphold Roberson’s death sentence…"According to filings obtained by The Dallas Morning News, Roberson’s lead attorney Gretchen Sween filed on Oct. 22 a motion seeking a status conference — or a pre-trial meeting for attorneys — which she said would allow for an evidentiary hearing to be scheduled as soon as possible.“This matter should not languish for months; it is in the interest of both parties to move with alacrity,” Sween wrote in the motion."

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "On Monday, Sween said there is no “legitimate purpose” for a monthslong delay. She noted that the appeal that got Roberson his stay was filed back in February, and that the attorney general’s office argued to dismiss it, so extensive review shouldn’t be necessary. “One would hope that the OAG (Office of the Attorney General) advocated for a dismissal only after reviewing the vast record, researching the germane law, studying Applicant’s voluminous new evidentiary proffers, and somehow  concluding that an execution was nevertheless justified,” Sween wrote. She also said the state is basing its timeline on a law that doesn’t apply in this case because the appeals court has “presupposed” that an evidentiary hearing is expected."

————————————————————

PASSAGE OF THE DAY:  "Roberson, 59, was convicted of capital murder in 2003 having been accused of shaking his 2-year-old daughter, Nikki, to death. His prosecution relied on proving Nikki showed a triad of symptoms associated with “shaken baby syndrome,” a medical determination that has since come under wide scrutiny by experts. Roberson’s legal team has long sought to present the evidence they’ve compiled since his capital murder trial that they say will prove his daughter died of accidental and natural causes. The Texas attorney general’s office, however, has argued there is still enough proof of abuse to uphold Roberson’s death sentence."

———————————————————————

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Roberson was last spared on Oct. 9, exactly one week before he was scheduled to be put to death by lethal injection. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals sent his case back to district court in light of a ruling made late last year in a similar case out of Dallas County. In that case, Andrew Roark’s conviction was vacated on the basis that the science of shaken baby syndrome had evolved, and that expert witnesses would have given different testimony had he gone to trial in 2024."

------------------------------------------------------

STORY: "State pushes back on evidentiary hearing in Robert Roberson’s death penalty case," by Reporter Jamie Landers, published by  The Dallas Morning News, on  November 112, 2025. (Jamie Landers is a breaking news reporter at The Dallas Morning News. She is a graduate of The Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication in Phoenix, where she studied journalism and political science. Jamie previously reported for The Arizona Republic and Arizona PBS.)

SUB-Heading: "Here’s a look at what has happened in the courts since the 59-year-old got his third stay of execution on Oct. 9."

PHOTO CAPTION: "Robert Roberson, the Palestine man facing execution for the death of his 2-year-old."

1

GIST: Documents filed in the weeks since Robert Roberson III was granted his third stay of execution show the state is pushing back on an evidentiary hearing that could lead to the new trial his attorneys have been chasing just shy of a decade.

Roberson, 59, was convicted of capital murder in 2003 having been accused of shaking his 2-year-old daughter, Nikki, to death. His prosecution relied on proving Nikki showed a triad of symptoms associated with “shaken baby syndrome,” a medical determination that has since come under wide scrutiny by experts.

Roberson’s legal team has long sought to present the evidence they’ve compiled since his capital murder trial that they say will prove his daughter died of accidental and natural causes. The Texas attorney general’s office, however, has argued there is still enough proof of abuse to uphold Roberson’s death sentence.

Roberson was last spared on Oct. 9, exactly one week before he was scheduled to be put to death by lethal injection. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals sent his case back to district court in light of a ruling made late last year in a similar case out of Dallas County. In that case, Andrew Roark’s conviction was vacated on the basis that the science of shaken baby syndrome had evolved, and that expert witnesses would have given different testimony had he gone to trial in 2024.

According to filings obtained by The Dallas Morning News, Roberson’s lead attorney Gretchen Sween filed on Oct. 22 a motion seeking a status conference — or a pre-trial meeting for attorneys — which she said would allow for an evidentiary hearing to be scheduled as soon as possible.

“This matter should not languish for months; it is in the interest of both parties to move with alacrity,” Sween wrote in the motion.

Smith County District Judge Austin Reeve Jackson responded the next day, and asked that both parties provide dates they would not be available for the hearing between now and Jan. 31, 2026. He also asked for a brief summary of each side’s expectations for witnesses and time neededto proceed.

“This is not to say that a status conference or scheduling order will not be warranted at some time in the future, but Applicant puts the cart well ahead of the horse,” the state said. “... Even if the Court finds otherwise, it has discretion still on how to resolve the issues, which can include affidavits, depositions, etc. without the need for an evidentiary hearing.”

On Monday, Sween said there is no “legitimate purpose” for a monthslong delay. She noted that the appeal that got Roberson his stay was filed back in February, and that the attorney general’s office argued to dismiss it, so extensive review shouldn’t be necessary.

“One would hope that the OAG advocated for a dismissal only after reviewing the vast record, researching the germane law, studying Applicant’s voluminous new evidentiary proffers, and somehow concluding that an execution was nevertheless justified,” Sween wrote.

She also said the state is basing its timeline on a law that doesn’t apply in this case because the appeals court has “presupposed” that an evidentiary hearing is expected.

Sween outlined three instances in which judges cited the need for evidentiary development in their concurring opinions ordering the stay last month. In one, Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Bert Richardson said since Roberson has not been given a chance to challenge his conviction under the court’s new understanding of shaken baby syndrome, it was “correct to stay the execution and remand this case to the habeas court for Applicant to develop his claims in an evidentiary hearing.”

“A death sentence is clearly final and, once carried out, hindsight is useless,” Richardson wrote. “Thus, when moving forward in such a way, we should require the highest standards of accuracy so that we can act with a reliable degree of certainty.

“That is not possible with the record we presently have before us.“

Another judge wrote they should skip the remand and head straight to a new trial.

Jackson, the trial judge, has not yet responded with next steps.""

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/courts/2025/11/11/state-pushes-back-on-evidentiary-hearing-in-robert-robersons-death-penalty-case/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985

———————————————————————————————

FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Back In Action: Jesse Harvey: South Australia: Shaken Baby Syndrome Series: (Part 1): Australian author, blogger, and criminal justice analyst supreme, focuses on 'Jesse Harvey and the curse of SBS,' on his 'Wrongful Convictions Report,' noting that: It’s a tragic story that damns those who accept the junk science, compounded by the death since of both the young son and Jesse’s mother. SBS is another dark corner of the criminal justice system which is left unattended by those who are in a position to put it right."

ACCESS TO PODCAST:

diagnosingmurder

---------------------------------------------------

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "In Harvey’s trial in 2019, child abuse specialists from the Victorian Forensic Paediatric Medical Service (VFPMS) acknowledged Casey had a heart condition, including a heart murmur, based on the findings of a Royal Children’s Hospital cardiologist.They said the enlargement of the seven-week-old’s heart was “moderate” and that it was unlikely to have anything to do with what had caused his brain injury. But in a report produced at the request of the Diagnosing Murder podcast, forensic pathologist Stephen Cordner observed five problems with the prosecution’s medical evidence against Harvey that “seem not to have been explored, or were insufficiently explored” at his trial. In response to questions about the case, the Royal Children’s Hospital said it would be inappropriate to comment. "

-----------------------------------------------

POST: "Jesse Harvey and the curse of SBS', published by Andrew L. Urbin, on his Wrongful Convictions Report, on November 2, 2025. (Wrongful Convictions Report explores and exposes wrongful convictions and potential miscarriages of justice (mostly) in Australia. WCR’s research goals include the establishment of a reliable database of wrongful convictions and an overview of identifiable reforms that would reduce the likelihood and incidence of such errors in the criminal justice system.)

GIST: :Just as we were publishing a thorough debunking of the junk science behind Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS) in 2019, a 21 year old father in Victoria, Jesse Harvey, was sentenced to six years jail for the murder of his baby son by shaking him to death. Wrongly, as it turns out, but that is a typical SBS story. 

Jesse Harvey has served his sentence and speaking out, maintaining his innocence. The final episode of Diagnosing Murder (podcast) interviews Harvey for the first time. He said he was speaking out because “I spent the last six years in jail for something I didn’t do. I lost my son. And these people need to be held accountable because it’s going to continue to happen.”

Casey’s death certificate, obtained by this masthead’s investigative podcast, Diagnosing Murder, reveals a South Australian coroner concluded the boy’s cause of death was “aspiration and tracheitis [choking] on a background of acquired brain injury with epilepsy and arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy” – a serious congenital heart condition.

Diagnosing Murder is investigating shaken baby syndrome. A list obtained by the podcast shows the diagnosis has played a role in jailing well over 100 people in this country since 1995. The podcast raises questions about whether the diagnosis is based on reliable scientific evidence. 

In Harvey’s trial in 2019, child abuse specialists from the Victorian Forensic Paediatric Medical Service (VFPMS) acknowledged Casey had a heart condition, including a heart murmur, based on the findings of a Royal Children’s Hospital cardiologist.

They said the enlargement of the seven-week-old’s heart was “moderate” and that it was unlikely to have anything to do with what had caused his brain injury.

But in a report produced at the request of the Diagnosing Murder podcast, forensic pathologist Stephen Cordner observed five problems with the prosecution’s medical evidence against Harvey that “seem not to have been explored, or were insufficiently explored” at his trial.

In response to questions about the case, the Royal Children’s Hospital said it would be inappropriate to comment. 

At the trial, it was revealed that baby Casey spent three days in hospital in the lead up to the seizure that his father saw. He was treated for an infection, fever, irritability, poor feeding and vomiting. A lumbar puncture showed blood in his cerebrospinal fluid.

However, asked at the trial about this, the expert doctor said Casey’s illness did not show a medical cause for his seizure. It was “a separate thing from what occurred [the alleged shaking],” they said.

It’s a tragic story that damns those who accept the junk science, compounded by the death since of both the young son and Jesse’s mother. SBS is another dark corner of the criminal justice system which is left unattended by those who are in a position to put it right."

The entire post can be read at:

https://wrongfulconvictionsreport.org/2025/11/02/jesse-harvey-and-the-curse-of-sbs/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985

———————————————————————————————

FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Back In Action: Technology: Artificial intelligence: (Discredited 19th century Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso): 'The Intercept' (Reporter Sam Biddle) reports on AI experts who have issued an urgent warning against facial scanning with a "dangerous history," noting that, "An institute at New York University compares some machine learning products today to pseudoscience from the 19th century, and that: "Facial recognition has quickly shifted from techno-novelty to fact of life for many, with millions around the world at least willing to put up with their faces scanned by software at the airport, their iPhones, or Facebook’s server farms. But researchers at New York University’s AI Now Institute have issued a strong warning against not only ubiquitous facial recognition, but its more sinister cousin: so-called affect recognition, technology that claims it can find hidden meaning in the shape of your nose, the contours of your mouth, and the way you smile. If that sounds like something dredged up from the 19th century, that’s because it sort of is."

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Given recent developments illustrating the risk of 'facial recognition' this provocative story by  technology Reporter Sam Biddle, published by The Intercept several years ago,  on December 6, 2018,  is more relevant than ever - and well worth passing on to others. (Sam Biddle is a technology reporter focusing on issues of surveillance, privacy, and corporate power. He was previously a senior writer at Gawker.)

Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog. 

————————————————

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "“The ability to use machine vision and massive data analysis to find correlations is leading to some very suspect claims. That’s because “affect recognition,” the report explains, is little more than the computerization of physiognomy, a thoroughly disgraced and debunked strain of pseudoscience from another era that claimed a person’s character could be discerned from their bodies — and their faces, in particular. There was no reason to believe this was true in the 1880s, when figures like the discredited Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso promoted the theory, and there’s even less reason to believe it today."

—————————————————————

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Crawford and her colleagues are now more opposed than ever to the spread of this sort of culturally and scientifically regressive algorithmic prediction: “Although physiognomy fell out of favor following its association with Nazi race science, researchers are worried about a reemergence of physiognomic ideas in affect recognition applications,” the report reads. “The idea that AI systems might be able to tell us what a student, a customer, or a criminal suspect is really feeling or what type of person they intrinsically are is proving attractive to both corporations and governments, even though the scientific justifications for such claims are highly questionable, and the history of their discriminatory purposes well-documented.”

---------------------------------------------------

STORY: "ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE EXPERTS ISSUE URGENT WARNING AGAINST FACIAL SCANNING WITH A “DANGEROUS HISTORY,” by Sam Biddle published by The Intercept, on December 6, 2018.

SUB-HEADING: "An institute at New York University compares some machine learning products today to pseudoscience from the 19th century."

GIST: "FACIAL RECOGNITION has quickly shifted from techno-novelty to fact of life for many, with millions around the world at least willing to put up with their faces scanned by software at the airport, their iPhones, or Facebook’s server farms. But researchers at New York University’s AI Now Institute have issued a strong warning against not only ubiquitous facial recognition, but its more sinister cousin: so-called affect recognition, technology that claims it can find hidden meaning in the shape of your nose, the contours of your mouth, and the way you smile. If that sounds like something dredged up from the 19th century, that’s because it sort of is.

AI Now’s 2018 report is a 56-page record of how “artificial intelligence” — an umbrella term that includes a myriad of both scientific attempts to simulate human judgment and marketing nonsense — continues to spread without oversight, regulation, or meaningful ethical scrutiny. The report covers a wide expanse of uses and abuses, including instances of racial discrimination, police surveillance, and how trade secrecy laws can hide biased code from an AI-surveilled public. But AI Now, which was established last year to grapple with the social implications of artificial intelligence, expresses in the document particular dread over affect recognition, “a subclass of facial recognition that claims to detect things such as personality, inner feelings, mental health, and ‘worker engagement’ based on images or video of faces.” The thought of your boss watching you through a camera that uses machine learning to constantly assess your mental state is bad enough, while the prospect of police using “affect recognition” to deduce your future criminality based on “micro-expressions” is exponentially worse.

“The ability to use machine vision and massive data analysis to find correlations is leading to some very suspect claims.”

That’s because “affect recognition,” the report explains, is little more than the computerization of physiognomy, a thoroughly disgraced and debunked strain of pseudoscience from another era that claimed a person’s character could be discerned from their bodies — and their faces, in particular. There was no reason to believe this was true in the 1880s, when figures like the discredited Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso promoted the theory, and there’s even less reason to believe it today. Still, it’s an attractive idea, despite its lack of grounding in any science, and data-centric firms have leapt at the opportunity to not only put names to faces, but to ascribe entire behavior patterns and predictions to some invisible relationship between your eyebrow and nose that can only be deciphered through the eye of a computer. Two years ago, students at a Shanghai university published a report detailing what they claimed to be a machine learning method for determining criminality based on facial features alone. The paper was widely criticized, including by AI Now’s Kate Crawford, who told The Intercept it constituted “literal phrenology … just using modern tools of supervised machine learning instead of calipers.”

Crawford and her colleagues are now more opposed than ever to the spread of this sort of culturally and scientifically regressive algorithmic prediction: “Although physiognomy fell out of favor following its association with Nazi race science, researchers are worried about a reemergence of physiognomic ideas in affect recognition applications,” the report reads. “The idea that AI systems might be able to tell us what a student, a customer, or a criminal suspect is really feeling or what type of person they intrinsically are is proving attractive to both corporations and governments, even though the scientific justifications for such claims are highly questionable, and the history of their discriminatory purposes well-documented.”

Faception has purported to determine from appearance if someone is “psychologically unbalanced,” anxious, or charismatic, while HireVue has ranked job applicants on the same basis.

As with any computerized system of automatic, invisible judgment and decision-making, the potential to be wrongly classified, flagged, or tagged is immense with affect recognition, particularly given its thin scientific basis: “How would a person profiled by these systems contest the result?,” Crawford added. “What happens when we rely on black-boxed AI systems to judge the ‘interior life’ or worthiness of human beings? Some of these products cite deeply controversial theories that are long disputed in the psychological literature, but are are being treated by AI startups as fact.”

What’s worse than bad science passing judgment on anyone within camera range is that the algorithms making these decisions are kept private by the firms that develop them, safe from rigorous scrutiny behind a veil of trade secrecy. AI Now’s Whittaker singles out corporate secrecy as confounding the already problematic practices of affect recognition: “Because most of these technologies are being developed by private companies, which operate under corporate secrecy laws, our report makes a strong recommendation for protections for ethical whistleblowers within these companies.” Such whistleblowing will continue to be crucial, wrote Whittaker, because so many data firms treat privacy and transparency as a liability, rather than a virtue: “The justifications vary, but mostly [AI developers] disclaim all responsibility and say it’s up to the customers to decide what to do with it.” Pseudoscience paired with state-of-the-art computer engineering and placed in a void of accountability. What could go wrong?"

The entire story can be read at: 

artificial-intellgience-experts-issue-urgent-warning-against-facial-scanning-with-a-dangerous-history

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985

———————————————————————————————

FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

-------------------------------------------------------------------