Coralie Colmez
speaker
20 appearances
2 recordings
1 series
first heard Apr 2013
last heard May 2013
Coralie Colmez’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsNo recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.
Appearances
His justification for that was that just repeating this unreliable test wouldn't make the answer any more reliable.
The thing with statistics and probability is that people feel like it's quite intuitive and that, OK, this is unreliable, so it's never going to be more reliable.
But actually, the mathematics tells you that if you have an unreliable test, you do it again, it's just as unreliable, but you get the same answer, then you can be a lot more certain of that answer.
What this means in the case of the knife in the murder is that if it were tested again and once again the DNA was Meredith's profile, we could be a lot more certain that the DNA on the knife is indeed Meredith.
And if the knife were tested again and the DNA profile didn't match Meredith Kirch's, that would be very good news for Amanda and Raffaele and that would mean that this major piece of evidence against them would be discredited.
Coralie Colmes.
The deaths were just forgotten about in the trial and never spoken of again.
But they never recalculated the probabilities that they had calculated in the very beginning.
What the brother and sister team did is they struck off all the ones that she had proven that she wasn't even there for and they recalculated the probability.
His justification for that was that...
just repeating this unreliable test wouldn't make the answer any more reliable.
The thing with statistics and probability is that people feel like it's quite intuitive and that, okay, this is unreliable, so it's never going to be more reliable.
But actually, the mathematics tells you that if you have an unreliable test, you do it again, it's just as unreliable, but you get the same answer, then you can be a lot more certain of that answer.
What this means in the case of the knife in the murder is that if it were tested again and once again the DNA was Meredith's profile, we could be a lot more certain that the DNA on the knife is indeed Meredith's.
And if the knife were tested again and the DNA profile didn't match Meredith Kirch's?
That would be very good news for Amanda and Raffaele and that would mean that this major piece of evidence against them would be discredited.
Coralie Colmes.
The deaths were just forgotten about in the trial and never spoken of again.
but they never recalculated the probabilities that they had calculated in the very beginning.
What the brother and sister team did is they struck off all the ones that she had proven that she wasn't even there for, and they recalculated the probability.
Showing 1–20 of 20