It is clear today that there is a significant phenomenon of wrongful convictions. Since safety theory and safety measures are not developed in the criminal justice system, we have to learn it from other areas, where modern safety is common practice, such as aviation, transportation and engineering. The article proposes some general principles for modern safety from false convictions, based on principles guiding other areas, as well as specific modern safety methods that can and should be applied in the criminal justice system, including: Establishing a “Safety in the Criminal Justice System Institute”; Enforcing accident (false convictions) and incident reporting duties; Developing education, training and a culture of safety; Applying "Identify-Analyze-Control" using the innovative STAMP safety model (“System-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes”); Creating redundancy; and Conducting an ongoing process of improvement. The high rate of false convictions is not an inevitable fate.  Professor of Law, Sapir Academic College, Israel; and College of Law & Business, Israel. I thank Prof. Rinat Kitai-Sangero for her tremendous help in all the stages of the writing. I also thank Justice Prof. Alex Stein, Prof. Alon Harel, Dr. Daniel Hartmann, Professor Nancy Leveson, Dana Rothman-Meshulam, Adv. James M. Doyle, Jayden Kitai-Sangero and the participants of the law school seminar in Sapir Academic College for their helpful comments on different drafts of this article. 2 Introduction I. Modern Safety from False Convictions II. Establishment of a “Safety in the Criminal Justice System Institute” III. Accident (False Conviction) and Incident Reporting Duties IV. Education, Training and a Culture of Safety V. "Identify-Analyze-Control" in the Criminal Justice System VI. An Ongoing Process of Improvement VII. Redundancy VIII. Starting with "Fly-Fix-Fly" Method Conclusion Introduction There is no greater injustice that a liberal state routinely inflicts upon its citizens than convicting the innocent. There have always been, and always will be, accidents. In some aspects of our life, this appears to be an inevitable reality. However, a high rate of accidents is not an unavoidable fact of life, but rather the product of human negligence and—when we are aware of the danger but do not act purposefully to reduce it—even indifference. At present, following the astonishing findings of the Innocence Project in the United States, and those of other studies throughout the world, we can no longer bury our heads in the sand. It is already clear today that there is a significant phenomenon of wrongful convictions. The article explores ways of reducing the false conviction rate. The criminal justice system should be categorized as what is termed in safety engi3 neering a “safety-critical system.” As systems of this type entail matters of life and death, any system error is likely to cause severe harm to both individuals and society at large. A false conviction is a system error and accident just like a combat-plane crash, not only from a metaphorical perspective but also in the very realistic terms of economic cost. The article constitutes an attempt to set the groundwork for developing a modern theory of safety for the criminal justice system, by drawing on the modern safety methods in fields with more experience than the criminal justice system. The suggested safety theory presented here is, moreover, universal, rather than being applicable only to certain criminal law systems. I believe that every criminal law system can benefit from adopting it. While presenting the fundamentals of modern system-safety, the article expands on the safety methods that, in my estimation, can and should be implemented in the criminal justice system, which, in contrast to some of the other safety-critical systems, is based primarily on human decisions and actions and less on technology. The article proposes specific modern safety principles and methods that can and should be applied in the criminal justice system already at the first stage of integrating safety into the system. 1 Mordechai Halpert & Boaz Sangero, From a Plane Crash to the Conviction of an Innocent Person: Why Forensic Science Evidence Should Be Inadmissible unless It Has Been Developed as a Safety-Critical System, 32 HAMLINE L. REV. 65, 70 (2009). 2 Boaz Sangero & Mordechai Halpert, A Safety Doctrine for the Criminal Justice System, MICH. ST. L. REV. 1293, 1304–05 (2011). 4 This is not an exhaustive list of principles and methods but, rather, some new steps on the way to safety, which I hope will be taken further by others. A few definitions and clarifications are needed at this stage. In criminal justice, a false conviction is the central equivalent to an accident such as an airplane crash. There are, of course, other types of accidents in criminal law besides false convictions, such as false arrest, an aggressive interrogation, or a humiliating search, which also cause significant harm to the suspect. Yet generally, false conviction is the most significant accident in that it causes the greatest amount of harm. False convictions as a group can, of course, be distinguished and classified by the severity of the harm caused. For example, it is clear that short-term imprisonment is graver than a fine, and long-term imprisonment is harsher than short-term imprisonment. Yet because all false convictions entail significant damage, including the stigma that attaches to the person who is falsely convicted and labeled a criminal, the suggested definition of accidents will cover all classes of false convic3 Sangero & Halpert, supra note 2, at 1300. Others have also compared wrongful convictions to plane crashes. See, e.g., Barry Scheck & Peter Neufeld, Toward the Formation of “Innocence Commissions” in America, 86 JUDICATURE 98 (2002). It should be clarified that although I use the term "accident", the accident of false conviction is not restricted to errors, but includes also cases of intentionally wrongful convictions, i.e. when a person is convicted although police officers or prosecutors positively knew or at least assumed that the defendant was not guilty, but nevertheless contributed to their conviction. Such occurrence is also an accident of the criminal justice system. 5 tions. With regard to what defines a “false conviction,” although all kinds of wrongful convictions should be prevented, including those marred by serious constitutional or other procedural or due process errors, the focus in this article is on convictions despite factual and actual innocence. It should be stressed that a false acquittal—a situation in which there was the evidence necessary to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt but the fact-finder mistakenly acquitted him—does not constitute an accident. It can instead be regarded as the criminal justice system’s failure to perform its function, just as when a plane fails to transport passengers to their intended destination. Safety in the criminal justice system can be defined using an adapted form of the U.S. Air Force definition, as freedom from conditions that can cause harm to innocent people, particularly from being falsely convicted. A more conservative definition could refer to the implementation of safety measures. Under this definition, safety means the reduction of the risk of 4 Marvin Zalman, An Integrated Justice Model of Wrongful Convictions, 74 ALB. L. REV. 1465, 1470 (2010–2011). See also LARRY LAUDAN, TRUTH, ERROR, AND CRIMINAL LAW 10 (2006). 5 Mordechai Halpert & Boaz Sangero, Towards Safety in the Criminal Justice System, 36 TEL AVIV UNIV. L. REV. 363, 372 (2012) (in Hebrew). 6 Sangero & Halpert, supra note 2, at 1300. 7 “Safety is the state in which the risk of harm to persons or of property damage is reduced to, and maintained at or below, an acceptable level through a continuing process of hazard identification and risk management.” INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION, SAFETY 6 harm to the innocent through an ongoing process of risk identification and management in the criminal justice system. Although it would not be realistic to attain a state of absolute safety, in which all innocent defendants are acquitted, resources should be invested in safety so as to diminish the rate of error in the system. In those fields in which there has traditionally been awareness of the need for modern safety—space, aviation, and transportation, for example—there is an ongoing attempt to improve safety, based on feedback that enables the determination of whether the previous safety goals have been attained and whether it is possible to move forward and set new goals. In the criminal justice system, however, there is no such feedback in general, due to what has been dubbed the Hidden Accidents Principle in criminal law, which considerably hinders any advancement in promoting safety. I will suggest ways to improve the criminal justice system despite this principle, such as implementing an incident-reporting duty and applyMANAGEMENT MANUAL 1.1 (2006), available at http://www.icao.int/fsix/_Library/SMM9859_1ed_en.pdf. See also Sangero & Halpert, supra note 2, at 1300–01. 8 Sangero & Halpert, supra note 2, at 1301. 9 Id. at 1314–16. In other fields, an accident is both detected and detectable. A defect in a car can cause its observable crash, just as a defect in a bridge can cause its observable collapse. The general inability to detect false convictions is a prominent characteristic of criminal law, and these “accidents” typically “remain undetected.” "There is no 'gold standard' for determining whether a conviction was incorrect. Indeed, if one were to exist, it would already be applied at trial." – id. 7 ing insights and experience from spheres of life in which accidents are discernible. It should also be clarified that the article is mainly theoretic and its purpose is to develop a new safety approach, learned from the areas of space, aviation,

中文翻译：

---

安全定罪

今天很明显，错误定罪的现象很严重。由于安全理论和安全措施不是在刑事司法系统中发展起来的，我们必须从其他领域学习，这些领域是现代安全的普遍做法，例如航空、交通和工程。本文基于指导其他领域的原则，以及可以并且应该应用于刑事司法系统的具体现代安全方法，提出了一些现代安全免于错误定罪的一般原则，包括：研究所”; 执行事故（错误定罪）和事故报告职责；发展教育、培训和安全文化；应用“识别-分析-控制” 使用创新的 STAMP 安全模型（“系统理论事故模型和流程”）；创造冗余；进行持续的改进过程。误判率高并不是必然的宿命。 以色列萨皮尔学院法学教授；和以色列法律与商业学院。我感谢 Rinat Kitai-Sangero 教授在写作的所有阶段提供的巨大帮助。我还要感谢法官 Alex Stein 教授、Alon Harel 教授、Daniel Hartmann 博士、Nancy Leveson 教授、Dana Rothman-Meshulam、Adv. 感谢 James M. Doyle、Jayden Kitai-Sangero 以及萨皮尔学院法学院研讨会的参与者对本文不同草稿的有益评论。2 引言 I. 远离虚假定罪的现代安全 II．建立“刑事司法系统安全研究所” III．事故（误判）和事故报告义务 IV．教育、培训和安全文化 V. 刑事司法系统中的“识别-分析-控制” VI．持续改进的过程 VII．冗余八。从“Fly-Fix-Fly”方法开始 结束语 引言 自由主义国家对其公民施加的不公正待遇没有比给无辜者定罪更大的不公。事故一直存在，也将永远存在。在我们生活的某些方面，这似乎是不可避免的现实。然而，高事故率并不是生活中不可避免的事实，而是人类疏忽以及——当我们意识到危险但没有有目的地采取行动来减少危险——甚至漠不关心的产物。目前，随着美国无罪计划的惊人发现，和世界各地的其他研究一样，我们不能再把头埋在沙子里。今天已经很清楚，错误定罪的现象很严重。文章探讨了降低误判率的方法。刑事司法系统应归类为安全工程中所谓的“安全关键系统”。由于此类系统涉及生死攸关的问题，任何系统错误都可能对个人和整个社会造成严重伤害。错误定罪是系统错误和事故，就像战机坠毁一样，不仅从比喻的角度来看，而且从经济成本的非常现实的角度来看也是如此。本文试图为发展现代刑事司法系统安全理论奠定基础，通过在比刑事司法系统更有经验的领域利用现代安全方法。此外，这里提出的建议安全理论是普遍的，而不是仅适用于某些刑法体系。我相信每个刑法系统都可以从采用它中受益。在介绍现代系统安全的基本原理的同时，本文扩展了在我看来可以而且应该在刑事司法系统中实施的安全方法，与其他一些安全关键系统相比，该系统基于主要是关于人类的决定和行动，而不是技术。本文提出了具体的现代安全原则和方法，这些原则和方法可以而且应该在刑事司法系统中应用，这些原则和方法已经处于将安全融入系统的第一阶段。1 Mordechai Halpert & Boaz Sangero，从飞机失事到无辜者的定罪：为什么法医科学证据不应被采纳，除非它已被开发为安全关键系统，32 HAMLINE L. REV。65, 70 (2009)。2 Boaz Sangero 和 Mordechai Halpert，刑事司法系统的安全原则，MICH。英石。L. REV。1293, 1304–05 (2011)。4 这不是一个详尽的原则和方法清单，而是通往安全之路的一些新步骤，我希望其他人能够进一步采取这些步骤。在这个阶段需要一些定义和澄清。在刑事司法中，错误定罪的核心等同于诸如飞机失事之类的事故。当然，除了错误定罪之外，刑法中还有其他类型的事故，例如错误逮捕、侵略性审讯或羞辱性搜查，这也对嫌疑人造成重大伤害。然而，一般来说，误判是最严重的事故，因为它会造成最大的伤害。当然，作为一个群体的错误定罪可以根据所造成伤害的严重程度进行区分和分类。例如，很明显，短期监禁比罚款更严重，长期监禁比短期监禁更严厉。然而，由于所有错误定罪都会带来重大损害，包括被错误定罪并被贴上罪犯标签的人所带来的耻辱，因此建议的事故定义将涵盖所有类别的错误定罪3 Sangero & Halpert，前注 2，第 1300 页。还将错误定罪与飞机失事进行了比较。参见，例如，Barry Scheck 和 Peter Neufeld，在美国成立“无罪委员会”，86 JUDICATURE 98 (2002)。需要澄清的是，虽然我使用了“事故”一词，但误判事故不仅限于错误，还包括故意误判的情况，即当一个人被定罪时，尽管警察或检察官肯定知道或至少假设被告无罪，但仍然促成了他们的定罪。这种情况也是刑事司法系统的一个意外。5 次。关于“虚假定罪”的定义，尽管应防止各种错误定罪，包括那些因严重的宪法或其他程序或正当程序错误而受损的定罪，但本文的重点是尽管事实和实际无罪的定罪。应该强调的是，虚假无罪宣判——有必要的证据证明被告有罪，排除了合理怀疑，但事实发现者错误地宣告了他无罪——不构成意外。相反，它可以被视为刑事司法系统未能履行其职能，就像飞机未能将乘客运送到预定目的地一样。刑事司法系统中的安全可以使用美国空军定义的改编形式来定义，即不受可能对无辜人民造成伤害的条件的影响，特别是免于被错误定罪。更保守的定义可以指安全措施的实施。在此定义下，安全意味着降低风险 4 Marvin Zalman, An Integrated Justice Model of Wrongful Convictions, 74 ALB。L。转。1465、1470（2010-2011）。另见 LARRY LAUDAN, TRUTH, ERROR, AND Criminal Law 10 (2006)。5 Mordechai Halpert 和 Boaz Sangero，刑事司法系统中的安全，36 特拉维夫大学。L. REV。363, 372 (2012)（希伯来文）。6 Sangero & Halpert, 前注 2, at 1300. 7 “安全是指通过持续的危险识别过程，将人身伤害或财产损失的风险降低并保持在可接受水平或以下的状态和风险管理。” 国际民用航空组织，安全 6 通过刑事司法系统中持续的风险识别和管理过程对无辜者造成伤害。虽然实现绝对安全的状态是不现实的，在这种状态下，所有无辜的被告都被无罪释放，应在安全方面投入资源，以减少系统中的错误率。在那些传统上意识到现代安全需求的领域——例如太空、航空和运输——正在不断尝试提高安全性，基于反馈，可以确定以前的安全目标是否已经实现以及是否有可能继续前进并设定新的目标。然而，在刑事司法系统中，由于在刑法中被称为“隐藏事故原则”，因此一般没有这种反馈，这大大阻碍了促进安全的任何进展。尽管有此原则，我仍会提出改进刑事司法系统的建议，例如实施事件报告义务和应用管理手册 1.1 (2006)，可在 http: //www.icao.int/fsix/_Library/SMM9859_1ed_en.pdf。另见 Sangero & Halpert，前注 2，1300-01。8 Sangero & Halpert，前注 2，1301。9 Id。在 1314-16。在其他领域，事故既可检测又可检测。汽车的缺陷会导致可观察到的碰撞，就像桥梁的缺陷会导致可观察到的倒塌一样。普遍无法发现虚假定罪是刑法的一个突出特征，而这些“事故”通常“未被发现”。“没有确定定罪是否不正确的‘黄金标准’。事实上，如果存在，它已经在审判中应用了。” - ID。7 来自生活领域的洞察力和经验，在这些领域中事故是可辨别的。