It should be clear to most that Science on Trial has embarked on a profoundly important mission: to scrutinise and analyse the use of scientific evidence in our criminal justice system. Our work operates at the crucial intersection of science and law, a nexus where precision, accuracy, and reliability in scientific evidence are not just academic ideals but real factors that can determine life outcomes.
Until now, our work has been self-funded, a model that has served us well in establishing our foundations. However, as we seek to broaden our impact and take on more complex, demanding cases, we recognise the need for a more sustainable, expansive financial framework. The implications of these cases are not just about the fate of one individual; they are about the integrity of our justice system. The importance of our continued work, particularly in cases that lie in the public interest, cannot be overstated. When a case can impact the rights, health, or finances of the public, or shape the way laws are interpreted in the future, our intervention becomes paramount. We believe in justice not just for those directly involved, but for our society at large.
Recently, we committed to filing an application for an intervention, in the Lucy Letby Appeal, in the Court of Appeal. We are in the process of retaining counsel to complete our legal filings, and we are actively compiling experts. An intervention in the Court of Appeal requires exhaustive scientific analysis, legal preparations, and, quite often, the procurement of expert testimony — processes that are, inevitably, resource-intensive. But the importance of this intervention being in the "public interest" is paramount. The work of SoT may have far-reaching implications, affecting not just the individuals in question but potentially the standards and applications of law and science in jurisdictions at large.
Moreover, our mission is expanding. We are initiating extensive scientific reviews of the cases of Ben Geen and Victorino Chua, which present intricate, challenging scientific queries that we believe merit a closer look. Each case represents an individual's life, and broader societal questions about how we utilise science in our justice system.
This is why we are reaching out for public support through fundraising. Your contributions are not just about keeping our operations afloat. They're an investment in justice, in the integrity of science, and in the essential belief that every individual deserves a fair trial — one where evidence is not just presented, but also robustly scrutinised.
To continue our work at the scale and depth that these cases demand, we need your support. We are kickstarting our fundraising campaign, and every contribution will go directly into funding our non-profit activities. We will release a monthly statement regarding fundraising activities and the diversion of these funds to different projects undertaken by SoT. This ensures that we can continue to delve into these cases, stand up in court, and champion the role of sound scientific evidence in the justice system.
By supporting Science on Trial, you're not just funding an organisation; you are investing in a fairer, more just world. Your contribution ensures that justice is served, not just for the Lucy Letbys, Ben Geens, and Victorino Chuas of the world, but for every individual who finds themselves at the crossroads of science and law.
Please help us to keep Reevaluating Scientific Evidence so we can Reclaim Justice.
— The Team at Science on Trial
See below for our fundraising campaign video: