Jennifer Barringer Fox News-A new low?

[DaleA]

One of the other gun sites posted this link. I caught some of the Dallas shooting news coverage on CNN and was amazed at how the newscasters felt they had to keep talking even though they had nothing to say.

Fox News took it one step further and got Jennifer Barringer, a ‘forensics expert' to comment on the type of gun the shooter might have been using. You can see the video here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYhA...ature=youtu.be

Why they thought she was an expert is a mystery. Also why no one stepped forward and stopped her is a mystery. It’s Texas for heaven sakes and other news folk, camera persons or someone on the cleaning crew at the studio could certainly have been asked and given a more ‘professional’ opinion than Ms. Barringer. I wonder if Fox News has apologized for this gaffe?

[BarryLee]

Ok, while it was painful (double shot weapon?) but I agree to a certain extent that hunting rifles can be just as dangerous as the civilian AR15. As a matter of fact I suspect we all realize that many hunting rifles are even potentially more dangerous which is exactly why the attacks on the AR15 make no sense at all.

[DaleA]

I won't disagree with a single thing you said BarryLee but the 'double shot' comment was only one of a plethora of mistakes and gaffes she made...and they went and got her as an 'expert'!!!???

[kmw1954]

I believe the whole story was wrong. I think it was a single action rifle with an automatic shooter. Yikes!

[JT-AR-MG42]

We do tend to see these sorts of glaring mistakes more on firearms stories.

The networks would never use anybody but a Doctor for medical 'expert' input, but obviously could
really care less about getting little, if any, correct on a gun story.

But hey, it's called 'The Faux News Channel' for a reason.

JT

[Glenn E. Meyer]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Lee_Barringer

She's quite a piece of work. Her reputation as a gun guru is growing by leaps and bounds.

I wonder for our lawyers here - there is a standard to be allowed to be an expert in court. Would this performance be used to disqualify her?

[2ndsojourn]

Yeah, I saw that commentary the other morning on Fox. The part that made me laugh was when one of them talked about "an adapter to make it shoot faster". And putting a scope on a hunting rifle makes it an assault rifle.

[DaleA]

Just to be fair and balanced concerning Jennifer Barringer

I DID go to my local grocery store and in Minnesota at least, she is correct, there are magazines galore there. People magazine, Time magazine and Reader’s Digest were all there and were being sold indiscriminately with no checks that I could see to confirm anyone’s age or criminal background. And make no mistake about it, many of these are HIGH CAPACITY magazines with 30 to 40 articles which of course raises the question, just who needs to read that much?

For a more professional critique of Ms Barringer’s comments please see this video vindicating the ‘Double Shot Assault Rifle Clip Scope Adapter From Grocery Store’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clxRz-AXv8o

[Brian Pfleuger]

For the first time in my life, this compelled me to contact a news organization about one of their "experts". I've seen "experts" that should have been embarrassed to be so called but I've never seen one quite that terrible. That woman may as well have used one of those "fill in the blanks" stories we did in grade school. You know, "proper noun here ", "adjective here", then you read the story. It would have been just as factual.

[Mainah]

I've got a relative who has been contacted by Fox producers a few times for on air interviews. I think that being blond and looking okay on TV is a big factor in their expertise evaluation.

[Quentin2]

Maybe the speed up adapter is a bump fire stock? I'll run down to my grocery store and get one now! I want the one with the double shot glass!

Well, if they're out of stock maybe some string and rubber bands! I've heard bump firing improves accuracy so you must add a scope to your new "assault rifle"!

(I think everyone knows we're making fun of the forensics "expert", not making light of the tragic attack in Dallas.)

[Armed_Chicagoan]

Hey, it could be worse! Anyone remember that ATF agent who was on TV claiming that airsoft M-16s could be converted to real firearms?

[Aguila Blanca]

She is a member of SAG and AFTRA and is suspended from practicing law in the state of New Jersey.

Great street creds. It would appear that she should go into partnership with Nancy Grace.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I wonder if there is a picture yet of someone buying the mouthwash (Scope) and a copy of TV Guide at the grocery store.

[lefteye]

With respect to the incident she is addressing, she is an absolute moron! I apologize to innocent humans with mental problems, but this woman is NOT innocent!

[Sure Shot Mc Gee]

Oh well another college trained intellectual.

[SC4006]

Wow, she may actually be worse than senator Kevin de Leon talking about "ghost guns" that can "disperse 30 magazine clip in half a second".

[RAfiringline]

One of these types will probably be elected president.

[Gary L. Griffiths]

I wonder for our lawyers here - there is a standard to be allowed to be an expert in court.

FWIW, I R 1! I was qualified back in the day to give expert testimony on firearms, and did so on two occasions. The only thing I recall was the prosecutor asking some pretty general questions about firearms, and IIRC, the judge also asked a couple of questions. The prosecutor then moved I be qualified as an expert, the defense made no objection, and the judge ruled me an expert. And that was back before the current Federal Rules of Evidence.

Nowadays, anyone can provide expert testimony on matters where they have special knowledge on a topic not generally known to the public, and which is pertinent to the issue in question in court. The safeguard is that the opposing counsel must be prepared to attack the expert's credentials or offer opposing testimony from another expert.

A few fields have standards for experts, such as the American Board of Forensic Odontology, many of which are sub-organizations of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences. Sadly, there is a good deal of chicanery in many of the forensic specialties.

[Evan Thomas]

Sadly, there is a good deal of chicanery in many of the forensic specialties.

That's almost inevitable in a system where opposing parties hire and pay their own experts. No matter how cut-and-dried a set of facts might seem, there's always incentive for some "expert" out there to testify to the opposite. In many cases, it would be more sensible to have both parties stipulate to a single, court-appointed expert, or even to more than one, but that would never fly in the US system, which takes "adversarial" to ridiculous levels.

[ATN082268]

Originally Posted by Evan Thomas

That's almost inevitable in a system where opposing parties hire and pay their own experts. No matter how cut-and-dried a set of facts might seem, there's always incentive for some "expert" out there to testify to the opposite. In many cases, it would be more sensible to have both parties stipulate to a single, court-appointed expert, or even to more than one, but that would never fly in the US system, which takes "adversarial" to ridiculous levels.

Since both sides can shop around to find an "expert" to say what they want to hear in court, what is the point in an expert witness other than to run up the bill?

[zukiphile]

Since both sides can shop around to find an "expert" to say what they want to hear in court, what is the point in an expert witness other than to run up the bill?

Expert witnesses are like people generally. Some are great, some are awful, many are only marginally useful.

A really good expert can convey a lot of information and experience succinctly and simply. This allows a judge, or sometimes even a juror, neither of whom are necessarily very interested in any aspect of the case, to digest the issue on which the witness offers testimony.

Experts, whether medical doctors, engineers, architects or appraisers, who give their client whatever that client wanted to hear, tend to become known and discounted appropriately. There is a technical term for these experts; restraint and decorum prevent me from divulging it.

[4EVERM-14]

Real Firearms and Toolmark Examiners have resumes that include special classes and seminar credits plus years of specific job experience. A full accounting of their attainments is required before their testimony can be believed. Barrington has none of this. She thinks five minute looking in a microscope can match bullets like they do on TV. Professionals routinely discredit her but only after she has made outrageous statements.

[TimSr]

I saw it for the first time last night. Wow. I think they would have been better off featuring a random lady in a grocery store. If she is ever called as an expert in a trial, I think playing that clip would impeach her credibility to any juror who had even a remote knowledge of firearms.

[Brian Pfleuger]

I never got a response from Fox. In spite of the tag "usually responds within 1 hour" under the messaging icon.