The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
One thing is separating witnesses right away because if you and I witness a crime and then you say, "Oh my god, you know, I think the guy had long hair." and I say, "No, no, I think it was uh short hair or whatever." We're influencing each other's memory. And things that we say end up changing what the other believes to be true.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.