It's going to be a week and they've yet to release his name even though they lied and said they knew it yesterday. Given this much of a head start, HOPEFULLY, he could be anywhere in the world rn.
It's going to be a week and they've yet to release his name even though they lied and said they knew it yesterday. Given this much of a head start, HOPEFULLY, he could be anywhere in the world rn.
Most forensics is junk. Doesn't mean it isn't used though. Do I trust software to do that? No. I can identify my friends and family by their walk though.
Yeah, once you notice it, everybody walks just a little bit funny. Gait detection is one of the only bits of social (as in people, bullet forensics is usually solid) forensics that I can believe whatsoever
It's valid enough that watching someone walk is used for medical diagnosis
it is used to diagnose problems with their gait, not like cancer or crisis of identity
It's used to diagnose neurological conditions.
Anecdotal, but I used to know someone with prosopagnosia (face blindness). They'd frequently identify people from further away than I could, partially due to their gait, whereas I had to wait until I could make out their face.
It's me, your friend! I can often identify people from behind, better than face-to-face, because the face will just cause a distraction for me to identify. Height, clothes/style, gait, body shape, voice, etc... all of these things are put together quickly for identifying someone, as the face is tricksy to my brain
deleted by creator
"Little Brother" readers unite.
I didn't say they wouldn't use it, just that there is no reason you would have to "negate" it. It is clearly just more computer phrenology meant to get jurors to agree to convict. It's not like there's a gait database tied to individuals out there
Gaitabase
More like "see you laterbase"
:avril-lavigne-shining:
If they're going to use it, there's reason to negate it.