hacklink hack forum hacklink film izle hacklink marsbahisizmir escortsahabetpornJojobetcasibompadişahbetBakırköy Escortcasibom9018betgit casinojojobetmarsbahismatbet

Tag: Trials

  • Gilgo Beach suspect seeks to bar DNA evidence and have separate trials in 7 deaths

    Gilgo Beach suspect seeks to bar DNA evidence and have separate trials in 7 deaths

    NEW YORK — The New York architect facing murder charges in a string of deaths known as the Gilgo Beach killings is challenging the DNA evidence against him and seeking separate trials in the sprawling case.

    Rex Heuermann’s lawyers argue DNA analysis relied on by prosecutors is not widely accepted in the scientific community and should be excluded from the trial. The Long Island resident’s defense team also wants to break out the case against him into multiple trials.

    Since late 2010, police have been investigating the deaths of at least 10 people — mostly female sex workers — whose remains were discovered along an isolated highway not far from Gilgo Beach on Long Island’s south shore.

    Heuermann was arrested in 2023 and charged in the deaths of three of the victims between 2009 and 2010: Melissa Barthelemy, Amber Lynn Costello and Megan Waterman.

    While in custody, he was subsequently charged in the deaths of Valerie Mack in 2000, Jessica Taylor in 2003, Maureen Brainard-Barnes in 2007 and Sandra Costilla in 1993.

    Huermann has maintained his innocence and pleaded not guilty to all counts.

    Michael Brown, Heuermann’s attorney, said following a Wednesday court hearing that his client risks being improperly convicted because of the “cumulative effect” of the evidence put forward by prosecutors.

    He also argued there’s a “substantial disparity” in the evidence in the some of the deaths, which he maintained involves different time frames, killing methods and locations for disposing the bodies.

    “The danger of having count after count, victim after victim in the same trial is that ‘If there’s smoke, there’s fire’ mentality,” Brown said. “They shouldn’t be tried together. One issue has nothing to do with the other.”

    Prosecutors on Wednesday filed a written response to the DNA challenge and said they will respond to the motion for separate trials later. Heuermann’s next court date is Feb. 18.

    DNA results from hair strands found at some of the crime scenes are among the key pieces of evidence prosecutors have put forward in the case.

    Suffolk County District Attorney Ray Tierney has maintained the DNA science is sound and that his office will oppose separate trials.

    In their Wednesday filing, prosecutors argued that the “whole genome sequencing” technique utilized in the case has been accepted in peer-reviewed scientific journals and by federal regulators, paleontologists, virologists, and medical communities.

    The findings by Astrea Forensics, a California lab, were also independently corroborated by mitochondrial DNA testing, a methodology long accepted by New York courts, prosecutors said.

    Whole genome sequencing “enables more comprehensive collection and evaluation of DNA,” prosecutors wrote. It is “so widely used for scientific, medical, and forensic purposes, it would seem there is little question as to whether it has been accepted in the relevant scientific community.”

    Prosecutors also say Heuermann kept a “blueprint” of his alleged crimes on his computer that included a series of checklists with tasks to complete before, during and after the killings, as well as practical lessons for “next time.”

    Source link

  • ICYMI: McDonalds Concludes AI Drive-Thru Trials After Alleged Order Errors

    ICYMI: McDonalds Concludes AI Drive-Thru Trials After Alleged Order Errors

    Call it a boon or bane, artificial intelligence (AI) is gradually taking over the world. Today, you will find extensive use of technology, where human intelligence is being duplicated using machines, speeding up the overall workflow. So much so that the food and hospitality industry is investing hugely in AI for increased efficiency – one such instance being the fast food giant McDonald’s. Over the years, we came across news featuring how the chain is experimenting with technology to speed up its process. However, in a recent development, McDonald’s has reportedly pulled back one of their AI-based pilot projects after repeated errors.

    Also Read: How Popular Food Chains Use Artificial Intelligence (AI) To Deliver And Prepare Your Food Faster

    According to a report on CNN, McDonald’s has decided to pull back its AI drive-thru voice ordering system on trial at more than 100 restaurants in the United States. The report further states that this step was possibly taken after an alleged complaint by a social media user went viral, featuring the system picking up wrong orders from cars, producing bizarre food combinations and more.

    CNBC reports that in a statement, McDonald’s explained discontinuing their partnership with “IBM on AOT (automated order taking)”. “The technology will be shut off in all restaurants currently testing it no later than July 26, 2024,” the statement read, adding that they would be however continuing to utilise other IBM products across the system.

    Fox Business weighs in that McDonald’s partnered with IBM in 2021 to commence the AI drive-thru testing to determine if the technology can “simplify operations for crew and create a faster, improved experience”.

    Also ReadIndia Aims To Promote Artificial Intelligence In Food Processing Sector: Report

    Following McDonald’s announcement regarding concluding the AI drive-thru trials, people took to social media to share their thoughts on the use of AI-powered solutions.

    “McDonald’s halts its AI drive-thru trial. Over 100 locations are discontinuing the automated order systems. Are AI-powered solutions the future of fast food, or just a passing trend?” a post on social media platform X read.

    A comment read, “This is very disappointing on many levels.”

    A person wrote, “You can’t just replace everything with AI. Even if you use AI, there should be human intervention.”

    Another comment read, “A human touch is still the best option.”



    Source link