Probability clerks and probability judges: Or how to prevent probabilistic fallacies in court

Anne Ruth Mackor

Probability clerks and probability judges: Or how to prevent probabilistic fallacies in court

Transboundary Legal Studies

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

Many forensic experts report their findings in probabilistic terms. Experiments have shown that judges have difficulties understanding these reports and probabilistic reasoning in general. The use of probability theory in criminal courts seems to pose serious risks to the quality of judicial evidential decision making. I argue for more and better education and for the introduction of experts in probability theory as clerks or as members of specialized chambers of the court.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Legal Argumentation
Subtitle of host publication	Reasoned dissensus and commnon ground
Editors	Eveline Feteris , Harm Kloosterhuis, H. José Plug, Carel Smith
Place of Publication	The Hague
Publisher	Boom
Pages	111-120
Number of pages	10
ISBN (Electronic)	9789400114272
ISBN (Print)	9789462129214
Publication status	Published - Apr-2024
Event	Legal argumentation reasoned dissensus and common ground - the netherlands , groningen, Netherlands Duration: 16-Jun-2022 → 17-Jun-2022

Conference

Conference	Legal argumentation reasoned dissensus and common ground
Country/Territory	Netherlands
City	groningen
Period	16/06/2022 → 17/06/2022

Keywords

evidence
proof
probability
fallacies
judicial decision making
probability clerks
probability judges

Handle.net

Persistent link

2 Chapter

Risks of Incorrect Use of Probabilities in Court and What to Do about Them
Mackor, A. R., 2024, Risk and Responsibility in Context. Placani, A. & Broadhead, S. (eds.). New York and London: Routledge, p. 94-108 15 p. (Routledge Studies in Ethics and Moral Theory).
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › Academic › peer-review

Open Access
File
78 Downloads (Pure)
De kansendeskundige als lekenrechter: Artikel 116 Grondwet
Translated title of the contribution: The probability expert as a lay judge: Article 116 of the Dutch ConstitutionMackor, A. R. & Schutgens, R., 2022, Een nieuw commentaar op de grondwet . Rijpkema, B. & Ellian, A. (eds.). Boom Uitgevers Amsterdam, p. 451-466 17 p.
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › Academic › peer-review

Cite this

@inbook{67fc03d1e831453fa5b98ea2e4b8ca64,

title = "Probability clerks and probability judges: Or how to prevent probabilistic fallacies in court ",

abstract = "Many forensic experts report their findings in probabilistic terms. Experiments have shown that judges have difficulties understanding these reports and probabilistic reasoning in general. The use of probability theory in criminal courts seems to pose serious risks to the quality of judicial evidential decision making. I argue for more and better education and for the introduction of experts in probability theory as clerks or as members of specialized chambers of the court. ",

keywords = "evidence, proof, probability, fallacies, judicial decision making, probability clerks, probability judges",

author = "Mackor, {Anne Ruth}",

year = "2024",

month = apr,

language = "English",

isbn = "9789462129214",

pages = "111--120",

editor = "{Feteris }, Eveline and Harm Kloosterhuis and Plug, {H. Jos{\'e}} and Smith, {Carel }",

booktitle = "Legal Argumentation",

publisher = "Boom",

note = "Legal argumentation reasoned dissensus and common ground ; Conference date: 16-06-2022 Through 17-06-2022",

}

Probability clerks and probability judges: Or how to prevent probabilistic fallacies in court . / Mackor, Anne Ruth.
Legal Argumentation: Reasoned dissensus and commnon ground . ed. / Eveline Feteris ; Harm Kloosterhuis; H. José Plug; Carel Smith. The Hague : Boom, 2024. p. 111-120.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › Academic › peer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - Probability clerks and probability judges

T2 - Legal argumentation reasoned dissensus and common ground

AU - Mackor, Anne Ruth

PY - 2024/4

Y1 - 2024/4

N2 - Many forensic experts report their findings in probabilistic terms. Experiments have shown that judges have difficulties understanding these reports and probabilistic reasoning in general. The use of probability theory in criminal courts seems to pose serious risks to the quality of judicial evidential decision making. I argue for more and better education and for the introduction of experts in probability theory as clerks or as members of specialized chambers of the court.

AB - Many forensic experts report their findings in probabilistic terms. Experiments have shown that judges have difficulties understanding these reports and probabilistic reasoning in general. The use of probability theory in criminal courts seems to pose serious risks to the quality of judicial evidential decision making. I argue for more and better education and for the introduction of experts in probability theory as clerks or as members of specialized chambers of the court.

KW - evidence

KW - proof

KW - probability

KW - fallacies

KW - judicial decision making

KW - probability clerks

KW - probability judges

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9789462129214

SP - 111

EP - 120

BT - Legal Argumentation

A2 - Feteris , Eveline

A2 - Kloosterhuis, Harm

A2 - Plug, H. José

A2 - Smith, Carel

PB - Boom

CY - The Hague

Y2 - 16 June 2022 through 17 June 2022

ER -

Probability clerks and probability judges: Or how to prevent probabilistic fallacies in court

Abstract

Conference

Keywords

Handle.net

Fingerprint

Research output

Risks of Incorrect Use of Probabilities in Court and What to Do about Them

De kansendeskundige als lekenrechter: Artikel 116 Grondwet

Cite this