-
Combining reproducibility and repeatability studies with applications in forensic science Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2023-10-19 Hina Arora, Naomi Kaplan-Damary, Hal S Stern
Studying the repeatability and reproducibility of decisions made during forensic examinations is important in order to better understand variation in decisions and establish confidence in procedures. For disciplines that rely on comparisons made by trained examiners such as for latent prints, handwriting, and cartridge cases, it has been recommended that ‘black-box’ studies be used to estimate the
-
From specific-source feature-based to common-source score-based likelihood-ratio systems: ranking the stars Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2023-05-12 Peter Vergeer
This article studies expected performance and practical feasibility of the most commonly used classes of source-level likelihood-ratio (LR) systems when applied to a trace–reference comparison problem. The article compares performance of these classes of LR systems (used to update prior odds) to each other and to the use of prior odds only, using strictly proper scoring rules as performance measures
-
Information economics in the criminal standard of proof Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2023-03-14 Christian Dahlman, Anders Nordgaard
In this paper we model the criminal standard of proof as a twofold standard requiring sufficient probability of the factum probandum and sufficient informativeness. The focus of the paper is on the latter requirement, and we use decision theory to develop a model for sufficient informativeness. We demonstrate that sufficient informativeness is fundamentally a question of information economics and switch-ability
-
Odds ratios as a measure of disproportionate treatment: application to jury venires Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2023-03-13 Joseph B Kadane
Odds ratios have several advantages over other methods of measuring the degree of under-representation of cognizable classes of potential jurors. In particular, its advantage over comparative disparity is that it does not measure the extent of under-representation of some groups against an aggregate that includes the very group in question. Odds ratios in jury analysis are directly interpretable as
-
Likelihood ratios for categorical count data with applications in digital forensics Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2022-12-23 Rachel Longjohn, Padhraic Smyth, Hal S Stern
We consider the forensic context in which the goal is to assess whether two sets of observed data came from the same source or from different sources. In particular, we focus on the situation in which the evidence consists of two sets of categorical count data: a set of event counts from an unknown source tied to a crime and a set of event counts generated by a known source. Using a same-source versus
-
An epistemic theory of the criminal process, Part II: Packer, Posner and epistemic pressure Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2022-12-23 William Cullerne Bown
This is Part II of a novel ‘epistemic’ theory of the criminal process. Part I, a formal treatment of how poor measurements degrade control over systems of classification, was published in the last issue. This distinguished four distinct realms of control a policymaker may inhabit and established that the criminal process in the USA is trapped in the third best of these, routinely unable to establish
-
Likelihood ratio to evaluate handwriting evidence using similarity index Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2022-11-28 Jȩdrzej Wydra, Szymon Matuszewski
Previous methods to evaluate evidence from handwriting examinations were usually associated with a redefinition of how these examinations are to be made. Here we propose the likelihood ratio method for handwriting evidence evaluation which is fully compatible with the current handwriting examination protocols. The method is focused on the similarity between handwriting samples, quantified using Jaccard
-
‘This Crime is Not That Crime’—Classification and evaluation of four common crimes Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2022-07-14 Ke Xu, Hangyu Liu, Fang Wang, Hansheng Wang
As the basis of criminal penalty, criminal conviction, integral to the protection of fundamental rights and freedom of people constitutes the basis and the core issue of criminal trials. Based on the data published on China Judgments Online, we proposed two types of classification models to apply the data of four common crimes from China Judgments Online and expounded their applications in identifying
-
Inconclusives and error rates in forensic science: a signal detection theory approach Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2022-06-28 Hal R Arkes, Jonathan J Koehler
There are times when a forensic scientist may not be comfortable drawing a firm conclusion about whether a questioned sample that appears to contain useful identifying information did or did not come from a particular known source. In such cases, the forensic scientist may call the sample pair ‘inconclusive’. We suggest that signal detection theory (SDT), which is concerned with the detection of weak
-
Interview with Professor Colin Aitken Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2022-02-15 Aitken C.
This is the first in a series of occasional articles in Law, Probability & Risk: interviews with prominent statisticians who have contributed to the field. They will share their influences, achievements and expectations of where research in this area may head in the future.
-
A summary of the statistical aspects of the procedures for resolving potential employment discrimination recently issued by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance along with a commentary Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2022-02-14 Joseph L Gastwirth
On 5 November 2020, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance in the Department of Labor issued new rules codifying the procedures it will use to resolve equal employment issues. First, this article summarizes the new rules focusing on how the agency will use and evaluate statistical evidence in its monitoring of government contractors’ compliance with equal employment laws. After noting the diminished
-
On the interplay between practical and statistical significance in equal employment cases Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2022-02-13 Joseph L Gastwirth, Weiwen Miao, Qing Pan
The distinction between statistical and practical significance often arises in the analysis of large data sets, where seemingly small disparities can reach statistical significance at the 0.05 level. In 2014, the opinion in Jones v. Boston created a split in the circuits when it relied solely on statistical significance. The opinion noted that there is no generally accepted definition of practical
-
Priors neutral between the parties: the Batson motion in Idaho v. Ish Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2022-02-08 Kadane J.
AbstractFor Bayesian inference to be useful to a court, it is essential that the priors used should be neutral between the parties. ‘Neutrality’ reflects the idea that the fact-finder would want the statistical analyses to be fair to both parties. It is neither the same as the legal designation of which party has the burden of proof with respect to a particular matter, nor the standard of proof that
-
Comparing two probabilities: an essay in honour of Herman Chernoff Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2022-01-28 Kadane J.
AbstractThis is a story of a lawsuit in Japan, about an alleged incident in America thirty years before. The focus of the analysis is comparing the rates of skips in ballpoint pen writing in a diary. Chernoff proposed several methods to address the comparison between the skips observed in different passages in the diary. I also give my own alternative analysis of the data.
-
The Bayes’ factor: the coherent measure for hypothesis confirmation Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2021-12-28 Taroni F, Garbolino P, Bozza S, et al.
AbstractWhat have been called ‘Bayesian confirmation measures’ or ‘evidential support measures’ offer a numerical expression for the impact of a piece of evidence on a judicial hypothesis of interest. The Bayes’ factor, sometimes simply called the ‘likelihood ratio’, represents the best measure of the value of the evidence. It satisfies a number of necessary conditions on normative logical adequacy
-
The high reported accuracy of the standardized field sobriety test is a property of the statistic not of the test Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2021-11-29 Kane G, Kane E.
Abstract OBJECTIVE In the 1990s as the legal blood alcohol limit for driving changed, validation studies reported the Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SFST) to be accurate at discriminating between Blood Alcohol Concentrations (BAC) above or below several legal limits: 0.10, 0.08, 0.05 and 0.04%. We investigated the contribution of the validation studies’ choice of accuracy statistic to the SFST’s
-
Mt. Everest—we are going to lose many: a survey of fingerprint examiners’ attitudes towards probabilistic reporting Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2021-02-25 H Swofford, S Cole, V King
Over the past decade, with increasing scientific scrutiny on forensic reporting practices, there have been several efforts to introduce statistical thinking and probabilistic reasoning into forensic practice. These efforts have been met with mixed reactions—a common one being scepticism, or downright hostility, towards this objective. For probabilistic reasoning to be adopted in forensic practice,
-
Treatment of inconclusives in the AFTE range of conclusions Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2021-02-10 Heike Hofmann, Alicia Carriquiry, Susan Vanderplas
In the past decade, and in response to the recommendations set forth by the National Research Council Committee on Identifying the Needs of the Forensic Sciences Community (2009), scientists have conducted several black-box studies that attempt to estimate the error rates of firearm examiners. Most of these studies have resulted in vanishingly small error rates, and at least one of them (D. P. Baldwin
-
Using mixture models to examine group difference among jurors: an illustration involving the perceived strength of forensic science evidence Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2021-01-30 Naomi Kaplan-Damary, William C. Thompson, Rebecca Hofstein Grady, Hal S Stern
The way in which jurors perceive reports of forensic evidence is of critical importance, especially in cases of forensic identification evidence that require examiners to compare items and assess whether they originate from a common source. The current study discusses methods for studying group differences among mock jurors and illustrates them using a reanalysis of data regarding lay perceptions of
-
Coherently updating degrees of belief: Radical Probabilism, the generalization of Bayes’ Theorem and its consequences on evidence evaluation Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2021-01-27 Franco Taroni, Paolo Garbolino, Silvia Bozza
The Bayesian perspective is based on conditioning related to reported evidence that is considered to be certain. What is called ‘Radical Probabilism’ replaces such an extreme view by introducing uncertainty on the reported evidence. How can such equivocal evidence be used in further inferences about a main hypothesis? The theoretical ground is introduced with the aim of offering to the readership an
-
Extrapolating the weight of a homogeneous retail drug seizure using packing weight Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2021-01-25 Kadane J, Wilkinson E, Yohannan J.
AbstractWe propose a method that yields a probability distribution for the net weight of drug powder resulting from a seizure of stamp bags. The technique involves the posterior predictive distribution of a beta distribution under a conjugate prior. The convolution of two distributions is computed for two visually distinct groups of stamp bags from the same seizure.
-
A probabilistic account of the concept of cross-transfer and inferential interactions for trace materials Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-12-30 Franco Taroni, Patrick Juchli, Colin Aitken
The analysis of inferential interactions plays an important role in the description of the line of reasoning for a forensic evaluator in a case involving the cross-transfer of evidence. It is possible the two items of evidence may mean more to an evaluator when considered jointly than they do if considered separately. An approach to the evaluation of evidence, with particular attention to the factors
-
Letter to the Editors regarding Neumann, C. ‘Defence against the modern arts: the curse of statistics: Part 1—FRStat.’ Law, Probability and Risk, (2020) 19(1), 1–20 Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-12-10 Swofford H, Zemp F, Liu A, et al.
We read with interest the recent article by Neumann, ‘Defence against the modern arts: the curse of statistics: Part 1—FRStat’ (Neumann, 2020). We welcome scientific discussion on strategies to provide a stronger foundation to the pattern evidence disciplines and improve the transparency of the criminal justice system. We applaud the many researchers who have proposed various approaches and contributed
-
Should defense lawyers and prosecutors be appointed as judges? Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-09-27 Ruth Ben-Yashar, Miriam Krausz
This article analyses cases where independence between judges’ skills and states of nature affects decision efficiency in terms of the probability of making a correct collective decision, relative to the case where such independence does not exist. This article explains when it is advantageous to include either former defense lawyers who have expertise in obtaining an acquittal of defendants or former
-
Incorporating implicit knowledge into the Bayesian model of prior conviction evidence: some reality checks for the theory of comparative propensity Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-09-17 Peter M Robinson
The theory of comparative propensity, championed by the late Mike Redmayne, has been an influential theory underpinning normative models of the probative value of evidence of previous convictions in criminal trials. It purports to generalize an approximate probative value by means of a Bayesian model in which the likelihood of an innocent person having a criminal record is calculated by reference to
-
An epistemic interpretation of the posterior likelihood ratio distribution Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-09-16 Ronald Meester, Klaas Slooten
Often the expression of a likelihood ratio involves model parameters θ. This fact prompted many researchers to argue that a likelihood ratio should be accompanied by a confidence interval, as one would do when estimating θ itself. We first argue against this, based on our view of the likelihood ratio as a function of our knowledge of the model parameters, rather than being a function of the parameters
-
The logic of uncertainty in law and life Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-10-29 Clermont K.
AbstractMy central interest is decision making in the presence of epistemic uncertainty. A method appropriate for both specialized inquiries and everyday reasoning is based on credal logic, which employs multivalent degrees of belief rather than traditional probability theory. It accounts for epistemic uncertainty as unallocated belief. It holds that, when facing real uncertainty, if a person believes
-
Are judges influenced by legally irrelevant circumstances? Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-07-22 My Bergius, Emelie Ernberg, Christian Dahlman, Farhan Sarwar
Judges should not be influenced by legally irrelevant circumstances in their legal decision making and judges generally believe that they manage legally irrelevant circumstances well. The purpose of this experimental study was to investigate whether this self-image is correct. Swedish judges (N = 256) read a vignette depicting a case of libel, where a female student had claimed on her blog that she
-
Statistical issues arising in the Office of Federal Contract Compliance’s recent notice on nondiscrimination obligations’ of contractor’s and the concerns raised in the comments submitted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-05-08 Joseph L Gastwirth
A proposed rule announced by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance describing the way statistical tests will be used in compliance reviews led to the Chamber of Commerce filing a formal Comment. The comment raises several statistical issues, including the proper analysis of stratified data and the effect of large samples on tests of significance. The Chamber correctly pointed out that simple pooling
-
Defence against the modern arts: the curse of statistics: Part I—FRStat Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-04-28 Cedric Neumann
For several decades, legal and scientific scholars have argued that conclusions from forensic examinations should be supported by statistical data and reported within a probabilistic framework. Multiple models have been proposed to quantify and express the probative value of forensic evidence. Unfortunately, the use of statistics to perform inferences in forensic science adds a layer of complexity
-
Defence against the modern arts: the curse of statistics—Part II: ‘Score-based likelihood ratios’ Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-04-16 Cedric Neumann, Madeline Ausdemore
For several decades, legal and scientific scholars have argued that conclusions from forensic examinations should be supported by statistical data and reported within a probabilistic framework. Multiple models have been proposed to quantify and express the probative value of forensic evidence. Unfortunately, the use of statistics to perform inferences in forensic science adds a layer of complexity
-
Machine learning for determining accurate outcomes in criminal trials Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-03-16 Jane Mitchell, Simon Mitchell, Cliff Mitchell
Advances in mathematical and computational technologies have brought unique and ground-breaking benefits to diverse fields throughout society (engineering, medicine, economics, etc.). Within legal systems, however, the potential applications of data science and innovative mathematical tools have yet to be embraced with the same ambition. The complex decision-making that is needed for reaching just
-
Classical probabilities and belief functions in legal cases Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-03-01 Ronald Meester
I critically discuss a recent suggestion in Nance (Belief Functions and Burdens of Proof. Law, Probability and Risk, 18:53-76, 2018) concerning the question which ratios of beliefs are appropriate when in criminal or civil cases one works with belief functions instead of classical probabilities. I do not call into question the use of belief functions themselves in this context, and I agree with in
-
Value of evidence in the rare type match problem: common source versus specific source Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-03-01 I N Van Dorp, A J Leegwater, I Alberink, G Jongbloed
In the so-called rare type match problem, the discrete characteristics of a crime stain have not been observed in the set of background material. To assess the strength of evidence, two competing statistical hypotheses need to be considered. The formulation of the hypotheses depends on which identification of source question is of interest (Ommen, 2017). Assuming that the evidence has been generated
-
Decision-theoretic and risk-based approaches to naked statistical evidence: some consequences and challenges Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-02-20 Rafal Urbaniak, Alicja Kowalewska, Pavel Janda, Patryk Dziurosz-Serafinowicz
In the debate about the legal value of naked statistical evidence, Di Bello argues that (1) the likelihood ratio of such evidence is unknown, (2) the decision-theoretic considerations indicate that a conviction based on such evidence is unacceptable when expected utility maximization is combined with fairness constraints, and (3) the risk of mistaken conviction based on such evidence cannot be evaluated
-
Introduction Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2020-01-31 Christian Dahlman
This special issue of Law, Probability and Risk contains three key-note papers that were presented at an international colloquium on the theory and methodology of legal evidence, on 26 April 2018, in the Faculty of Law at Lund University in Sweden. A common feature of all three papers is that they use Bayesian methodology in the evaluation of legal evidence and discuss the usefulness of this methodology
-
Dahlman and Mackor on coherence and probability in legal evidence: a commentary Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-12-20 Erik J Olsson
In their very rich and stimulating article, Dahlman and Mackor (2019) investigate a number of important aspects of coherence in law, outgoing from Van Koppen’s scenario theory and Amaya’s theory of inference to the most coherence explanation, which in its turn builds on Thagard’s analysis of explanatory coherence (Thagard, 2000; Van Koppen, 2011; Amaya, 2015). A major theme in their article is the
-
Coherence and probability in legal evidence Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-11-11 Christian Dahlman, Anne Ruth Mackor
The authors investigate to what extent an evaluation of legal evidence in terms of coherence (suggested by Thagard, Amaya, Van Koppen and others) is reconcilable with a probabilistic (Bayesian) approach to legal evidence. The article is written by one author (Dahlman) with a background in the bayesian approach to legal evidence, and one author (Mackor) with a background in scenario theory. The authors
-
De-biasing role induced bias using Bayesian networks Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-10-22 Mark Schweizer
The merits of using subjective probability theory as a normative standard for evidence evaluation by legal fact-finders have been hotly debated for decades. Critics argue that formal mathematical models only lead to an apparent precision that obfuscates the ad-hoc nature of the many assumptions that underlie the model. Proponents of using subjective probability theory as normative standard for legal
-
Fingerprints and paternity testing: a study of genetics and probability in pre-DNA forensic science Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-06-01 Daniel Asen
Abstract This article is a study of forensic science researchers’ attempts to develop paternity tests based on fingerprint patterning, a physical trait that is partially inherited. Pursued in different times and places—ranging from Austria to Japan to China and from the early 20th century to the 1990s—the projects under study represent an ongoing dialogue, carried out through decades of international
-
Case comment: differing interpretations of vaccine risk between courts and experts in Ministry of Health and Welfare (Taiwan) v. Chen Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-06-01 Jen-Ji Ho
Abstract Assessing the risk of vaccines is essentially a scientific issue. However, a court’s interpretation of scientific knowledge is not necessarily the same as that of scientists, especially in uncertain cases involving new vaccines or rare side effects. In 2017, the Supreme Administrative Court in Taiwan confirmed a disputed causal relationship between an H1N1 vaccine and a case of acute disseminated
-
Indemnity for a lost chance Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-06-01 Rafael Bassi Stern,Joseph Born Kadane
Abstract Civil liability for a lost chance occurs when a tortious action changes the probabilities of the outcomes that can be obtained by the victim. In such situations, the most commonly referenced rule of quantification is that of proportional damages. Based on this rule, the literature has proposed several formulae for quantifying damages. However, these formulae have limited applicability. For
-
Sample statistics as convincing evidence: a tax fraud case† Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-06-01 Jostein Lillestøl
This report deals with the analysis of data used by tax officers to support their claim of tax fraud at a pizzeria. The possibilities of embezzlement under study are overreporting of take-away sales and underreporting of cash payments. Several modelling approaches are explored, ranging from simple well-known methods to presumably more precise tools. More specifically, we contrast common methods based
-
Case comment: responding to the implausible, incredible and highly improbable stories defendants tell: a Bayesian interpretation of the Venray murder ruling Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-06-01 Hylke Jellema
In criminal trials, defendants often offer alternative explanations of the facts when they plead for their innocence. In its ruling on the Venray murder case, the Dutch Supreme Court dealt with the question when and how courts can reject such alternative explanations. According to the Supreme court, while courts should typically refer to evidence that refutes the explanation, they can also argue that
-
Calculating the Posterior Odds from a Single-Match DNA Database Search under various Scenarios with Minimal Assumptions Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-05-23 Ronald Meester,Klaas Slooten
-
Calculating the posterior odds from a single-match DNA database search with hidden assumptions Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-05-23 John T Wixted,Jeffery N Rouder
-
The opportunity prior: a proof-based prior for criminal cases Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-05-20 Norman Fenton, David Lagnado, Christian Dahlman, Martin Neil
One of the greatest challenges to the use of probabilistic reasoning in the assessment of criminal evidence is the ‘problem of the prior’, i.e. the difficulty in establishing an acceptable prior probability of guilt. Even strong supporters of a Bayesian approach have often preferred to ignore priors and focus on the likelihood ratio (LR) of the evidence. But to calculate if the probability of guilt
-
Ne bis in idem—a commentary on ‘Calculating the posterior odds from a single-match DNA database search’ Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-02-25 Ronald Meester,Klaas Slooten
-
Assessing randomness in case assignment: the case study of the Brazilian Supreme Court Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-02-25 Diego Marcondes, Cláudia Peixoto, Julio Michael Stern
Sortition, i.e., random appointment for public duty, has been employed by societies throughout the years, especially for duties related to the judicial system, as a firewall designated to prevent illegitimate interference between parties in a legal case and agents of the legal system. In judicial systems of modern western countries, random procedures are mainly employed to select the jury, the court
-
Rejoinder for Calculating the Posterior Odds from a Single-Match DNA Database Search Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-02-14 Jeffrey N Rouder,John T Wixted,Nicholas J S Christenfeld
-
Calculating the posterior odds from a single-match DNA database search Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-02-14 John T Wixted, Nicholas J S Christenfeld, Jeffery N Rouder
Forensic evidence is often quantified by statisticians in terms of a likelihood ratio. When the evidence consists of a DNA match, the likelihood ratio is equal to the reciprocal of the "random match probability" (p). When p is small (e.g., 1 / 10 million), the likelihood ratio is large (e.g., 10 million to 1). However, when a single match is obtained by searching a database, the prior odds that the
-
Reporting DNA database matches: we need more research Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-02-07 Marjan Sjerps
-
Communicating forensic evidence: Is it appropriate to report posterior beliefs when DNA evidence is obtained through a database search? Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-02-07 Cedric Neumann,Madeline Ausdemore
-
Assessing ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ without probability: an info-gap perspective Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2019-01-03 Yakov Ben-Haim
-
-
Self-correction of wrongful convictions: is there a ‘System-level’ confirmation bias in the Swedish legal system’s appeal procedure for criminal cases?—Part I Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2018-08-16 Moa Lidén, Minna Gräns, Peter Juslin
In this study, we propose that confirmation bias may not only be present in the behaviors of individual agents in the judicial system but can also be recognized at a “system-level” as an inability ...
-
Self-correction of wrongful convictions: is there a “System-level” confirmation bias in the Swedish legal system’s appeal procedure for criminal cases?—Part II Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2018-08-14 Moa Lidén,Minna Gräns,Peter Juslin
-
A formal approach to qualifying and quantifying the ‘goodness’ of forensic identification decisions Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2018-08-04 Alex Biedermann, Silvia Bozza, Franco Taroni, Paolo Garbolino
In this article, we review and analyse common understandings of the degree to which forensic inference of source—also called identification or individualization—can be approached with statistics and is referred to, increasingly often, as a decision. We also consider this topic from the strongly empirical perspective of PCAST (2016) in its recent review of forensic science practice. We will point out
-
Batson and reverse-Batson motions in North Carolina: State v. Hurd and State v. Tucker Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2018-07-23 Joseph B Kadane
-
Reconciliation of subjective probabilities and frequencies in forensic science Law Probab. Risk (IF 0.7) Pub Date : 2018-07-04 F Taroni, P Garbolino, A Biedermann, C Aitken, S Bozza
There is a continuous flow of articles published in legal and scientific journals that recite outworn direct or subtle attacks on Bayesian reasoning and/or the use of the subjective or personalistic interpretation of probability. An example is the recent paper written by Kaplan et al. (2016), who, by referring to Kafadar’s review paper (2015), opined, but did not justify, that there is a ‘… need to