I'm sure his false positive rate is zero, and that he's never caused an innocent person to be arrested or imprisoned. After all, he's in the top 1% on a test designed by people from Harvard. Yes, Harvard. Thank the lord that once a policeman's fingered a known criminal, a jury will never disagree with them. I bet his conviction rate is stellar.
They named a person in the article based just on this police officer's word. He might never be able to get a job again if this article stays on the first page of google hits for his name. Who knows if he's the same person? Is there anything else it could be based on?
