Judges, Juries, and Scientific Evidence
نویسنده
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Symposium: Modeling Human Decisionmaking in the Law the Neurobiology of Opinions: Can Judges and Juries Be Impartial?
In this Article we build on neuroscience evidence to model belief formation and study decisionmaking by judges and juries. We show that physiological constraints generate posterior beliefs with properties that are qualitatively different from traditional Bayesian theory. In particular, decisionmakers will tend to reinforce their prior beliefs and to hold posteriors influenced by their preferenc...
متن کاملThe neurobiology of opinions : can judges and juries be impartial ? ∗
In this article we build on neuroscience evidence to model belief formation and study decision-making by judges and juries. We show that physiological constraints generate posterior beliefs with properties that are qualitatively different from traditional Bayesian theory. In particular, a decision-maker will tend to reinforce his prior beliefs and to hold posteriors influenced by his preference...
متن کاملRunaway Judges? Selection Effects and the Jury
Reports about runaway jury awards have become so common that it is widely accepted that the US jury system needs to be ‘fixed.’ Proposals to limit the right to a jury trial and increase judicial discretion over awards implicitly assume that judges decide cases differently than juries. We show that there are large differences in mean awards and win rates across juries and judges. But if the type...
متن کاملCausation, Statistics, and the Law
More and more, judges and juries are being asked to handle torts and other cases in which establishing liability involves understanding large bodies of complex scientific evidence. When establishing causation is involved, the evidence can be diverse, can involve complicated statistical models, and can seem impenetrable to non-experts. Since the decision in Daubert v. Merril Dow Pharms., Inc. in...
متن کاملHighlighting violent and repetitive shaking.
Recent court decisions in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom have demonstrated confusion and uncertainty by the triers of fact, whether they be judges or juries, about the evidence presented in cases of alleged abusive head trauma. It is not surprising that judges and juries have a difficult time understanding and evaluating the evidence presented by the opposing sides of these c...
متن کامل