The Quarterly\u27s Fall 2001 issue published a Note reviewing our report, A Broken System: Error Rates in Capital Cases, 1973-1995. That Note has three inaccuracies that are so clear and frequently repeated, and are the result of such clear cite-checking lapses, that remedial steps are required. These matters do not involve differences of opinion, judgment, or interpretation between us and the Note\u27s author. Matters of that sort are appropriately addressed in a response. All instead are misstatements of fact that result from the Quarterly\u27s failure to fulfill its basic obligation to check the accuracy of verifiable factual statements it publishes. By forgoing peer-review, law journals rest their integrity on the care with which they cite-check articles to avoid statements with no credible support or basis. In default of that obligation, corrective action is required
