D. How is Bayes theorem important in avoiding fallacies commonly made in law and courtrooms?
I. Base rate fallacy
If presented with related generic, general information and specific information (information pertaining only to a certain case), the mind tends to ignore the former and focus on the latter. This can be avoided using Bayes’ Theorem, as it takes into account prior probability (which is the probability assessed before making reference to certain relevant observations, especially subjectively or on the assumption that all possible outcomes be given the same probability) and posterior probability (which is the conditional probability that is assigned after the relevant evidence or background is taken into account)
Example: Drunk drivers
…show more content…
Flaws of Bayes’ Theorem in Law and Courtrooms
The use of Bayes’ Theorem in legal cases have long been controversial for several of these reasons:
1) Assigning a subjective prior probability to the ultimate hypothesis is unreliable. This is because prior probabilities are often determined from past information or past events that may have slightly different parameters e.g. the probability of being guilty of murder given a history of domestic abuse and the probability of being guilty of murder given no history of domestic abuse have different parameters and thus cannot be seen as the same event. Prior probabilities could also be purely determined by an expert’s subjective assessment, which are subjected to flaws.
2) Not all evidence can be considered or valued in probabilistic terms. An example would be the type of voice the suspect has (raspy, high-pitched, deep) because there is no database to accurately form a probability for it.
3) Due to the complexity of cases and non-sequential nature of evidence presentation, any application of Bayes would be too cumbersome for a jury to use effectively and
Reasonable doubt plays a significant role in this particular case, as it requires a standard of unsurpassable evidence in order to be able to convict the plaintiff in a criminal proceeding. This is required under the Due Process Section in the Fifth Amendment of the American Constitution, allowing a safeguard and circumvention
Kassin, Saul, and Lawrence Wrightsman (Eds.). The Psychology of Evidence and Trial Procedure. Chapter 3. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1985. Print.
In a well-known study conducted by Judge Donald Shelton, jurors were asked various questions to see if there was a significant difference in the rate of acquittals between those who watched shows such as CSI and those who do not. Attorneys, judges, and journalists have claimed that watching television programs like CSI have caused jurors to wrongfully acquit guilty defendants when no scientific evidence has been presented. To test this, 1,027 jurors were randomly selected and given a questionnaire to fill out. Questions about their demographics were listed and the jurors were asked what kind of TV shows they watched, how often, and how real they believed these shows were. The survey asked questons about seven ty...
Test of the “harmless error” rule. Law and Human Behavior Vol. 21, No. 1, p.
Subsequently, one of the main components of the procedural limitation is innocent until proven guilty, which brings about the right to a Grand Jury- a panel that determines whether or not there is a need to go to trial. As a result, a guilty verdict in criminal cases is determined with evidence that is sufficient and that must be proved “‘beyond a reasonable doubt’” (pg.131), so there is an immense need to increase the chances for the respect of “reasonable doubt” (pg.
In the criminal justice system, the best chance of a fair trial and justice lies within cases that include physical evidence. Physical evidence, whether fibers, fingerprints, or DNA, can give a jury proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Physical evidence can convict a criminal, or it can free an innocent man. It can bring closure to families and to the law enforcement that work the cases. The following cases will show what physical evidence does in a criminal trial and the vast impact it can make. For each case I will examine how the physical evidence was important to the case and whether or not it could have made more of a difference if the presentation of the evidence were different. The five cases are: the Mosley case, the Warren case, the Chandler case, the Frediani case, and the Swift Case.
Therefore, the criminal justice system relies on other nonscientific means that are not accepted or clear. Many of forensic methods have implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or anything to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011). Defense experts are required to help the defense attorneys defend and breakdown all of the doubts in the prosecutors scientific findings in criminal cases. Scientific information is integral in a criminal prosecution, and a defense attorney needs to have an expert to assist he/she in discrediting the prosecution (Giannelli,
...ide evidence to a jury. The jury discusses the evidence that was provided and make a decision, which all have to agree on. The evidence has to be beyond a reasonable doubt. I just can not believe that people can get convicted of a crime if their DNA is not present at a crime. With that being said, I feel that DNA profiling is a great technique to use to convict a guilty person for the crime they committed or to exonerate an innocent person for the crime they did not commit.
Stevenson, D 2012, The function of uncertainty within jury systems, George Mason Law Review, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 513-548, viewed 6 May 2014, .
...T. M. (1997). Can the jury disregard that information? The use of suspicion to reduce the prejudicial effects of retrial publicity and inadmissible testimony. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(11), 1215-1226.
In order to understand how to compile evidence for criminal cases, we must understand the most effective types of evidence. This topic is interesting because there are ample amounts of cases where defendants have gotten off because of the lack of forensic evidence. If we believe forensic evidence is so important and it affects our decisions, then maybe we need to be educated on the reality of forensic evidence. If we can be educated, then we may have a more successful justice system. If we have a more successful justice system than the public could gain more confidence that justice will be served. In order to do this, we must find what type of evidence is most effective, this can be done by examining different types of evidence.
Our current trial by jury system was originally adopted from Anglo-Saxon English common law. Prior to juries, the United States had much more rudimentary methods that were in affect, such as bench trials. A bench trial consists of solely the judge determining the final verdict, versus a jury possessing that responsibility. Proceeding with a trial by jury assures that there will be a margin of error, simply due to the fact that the jurors are human, and are susceptible to human fallibility. Whether the jury is cognizant of it or not, emotions such as pre-determined bias and favoritism can impede or bring the case to a halt all together. According to Andy Leipold, a professor emeritus at the University of Illinois College of Law, the number of jury trial conviction rates have increased from 75 percent in 1946 to 84 percent from 1989 to 2002 (Krause). This sudden anomaly can be attributed to the influx of uneducated jurors, the increased cost of proceeding to trial, and improper juror selection.
Thus, the judge may know little more about the case than the facts necessary to support a guilty plea. When decision makers are faced with incomplete information and the predictions they are required to make are uncertain, defendant characteristics, such as the race of the offender is used to determine how dangerous they will be when out roaming in the streets. This may skew their decision and give partial sentencing verdicts.
The jury knows what they know, however, it’s the lawyer’s job to use the correct visual evidence to make the story complete and help them form their own opinion. In the Susan Wright murder trial, a lot of visual evidence was put forth to convict her of conducting murder. For example, according to a CNN article entitled,” Blue-eyed butcher sentenced to 20 years,” “A medical examiner testified he was able to count 193 wounds on the body, with the actual number of stab wounds well in excess of that” (Jakobsson, 2010, para. 6.) The adage of the adage.
Evidence collection is a crucial part of forensics. Its reliability can be compromised by input bias from law