What do we mean by forensics? This may not appear
immediately relevant but I’m sure it is.
The Forensic Science Society has invited crime fiction writer, Linda La
Plante to become a member because of the accuracy of her use of the subject
when most of the use of forensic science in crime writing is very inaccurate.
The item on the radio about this mentioned that the appearance of forensics in
so many TV drama series has led to a huge number of applications by youngsters
wanting to go into the profession. That has created a problem in that some of
the courses set up are not up to the standards required and that there are many
who’ve passed through such courses can’t find jobs.
Alongside the La Plante effect we must know there is also
the Countryfile or Attenborough effect. Lots of people interested in wildlife
and conservation as careers are looking for jobs and wanting to manage our
countryside and the wildlife in it. There are more people than jobs and so
there’s more call for lots of management from the job seekers themselves and
those in universities who want to run courses for them. This is the sad context
poor old Blacka finds itself in. We know it would be better left alone but all
those people in the industry can’t allow that to happen. They will do
anything, stoop to any kind of low machinations use any devious argument to prevent those on the outside
seeing what’s going on.
Hence the bogus consultations from SWT and SMP. Those consultations
have certainly not been forensic in its sense as “the
art or study of argumentation and formal debate.” Last year's SMP consultation deliberately and manipulatively eschewed debate. For which responsibility falls on all the partners but particularly Pete Spriggs
of Clearer Thinking, the facilitator whose job was supposed to be to run the
consultation. What else can you say about something that was fraudulent?
No comments:
Post a Comment