Abstract
The use of statistical evidence in court has attracted long-running controversy. Some uses of statistical evidence seem intuitively wrong, both in real cases (for example, Sally Clark) and in hypothetical examples (for example, the Gatecrasher Paradox). Yet, explaining why has proven to be difficult. One promising approach is that of Wasserman, who claims that using statistical evidence demeans the litigant's individuality and autonomy. This article presents Wasserman's argument, explores its merits, and defends it from some objections. However, the article also identifies six significant weaknesses, which have to be overcome before Wassermann's account can successfully identify the circumstances in which statistical evidence should be used or restricted.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 303-324 |
Number of pages | 22 |
Journal | International Journal of Evidence and Proof |
Volume | 12 |
Issue number | 4 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 1 Dec 2008 |
Keywords
- LEGAL evidence
- AUTONOMY (Psychology)
- INDIVIDUALITY
- GENERALIZATION
- INFERENCE (Logic)
- JURISTIC persons
- Fact-finding
- Factfinding
- Gatecrasher Paradox
- Generalisations
- Individuality
- Inferences
- Legal persons
- Predictions
- Previous convictions
- Statistical evidence