Science on Trial operates at the critical nexus of science and law, conducting meticulous scientific analyses of complex criminal cases that have hinged on scientific evidence — evidence that, in some instances, has been used unreliably, leading to potential miscarriages of justice. Our non-profit work is dedicated to scrutinizing such cases, dissecting the scientific underpinnings of the evidence presented, and, crucially, seeking to right the scales of justice where there have been indications of imbalance.
As we undertake this significant analysis, our goal remains steadfast: to ensure that the scientific evidence in each case is sound, reliable, and examined through an unbiased lens. Where there exist discrepancies, overlooked facts, or potential biases in the original trial's handling of scientific data, it is our utmost priority to bring these to light.
In this endeavour, Science on Trial stands as a guardian of truth, propelled by the belief that justice thrives where science is accurate, and every individual's right to a fair trial is inviolable. We extend our deepest gratitude to our supporters — because of you, we forge ahead, committed to the principles of justice served through the conscientious application of science.
Science on Trial embarked on its mission with the intricate analysis of the Lucy Letby case, a significant undertaking that not only underscored our commitment to applying rigorous scientific scrutiny in legal matters but also served as a pivotal proof of concept for our initiative. The case, involving a healthcare professional charged with multiple counts of murder, was steeped in complex scientific and medical evidence, the nuances of which became the fulcrum upon which the prosecution's case rested.
Science on Trial is both proud and grateful to announce the initiation of an in-depth scientific analysis of the Ben Geen case, a project that has been made possible through the unwavering support and dedication of our community to uphold the sanctity of accurate science within the realms of criminal justice. Ben's case is complex, rife with generalised medical claims but lacking in solid scientific findings. It is a case that hinges heavily on the interpretation of disparate, and allegedly unique events, and how they were purported to correlate with the presence and actions of Mr. Geen.