Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Science, Math, and Philosophy
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10  
Old 05-26-2007, 12:04 PM
Chimp Chimp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: L.A.
Posts: 120
Default Re: My Take

[ QUOTE ]

Maybe. I think it's a judgement call. I'm disposed toward the current unanimous system for criminal cases. But you have a point.


[/ QUOTE ]

Unanimity is not always required in the US. Many states allow majority or super-majority verdicts in civil trials. A much smaller number allow them in criminal trials. At least, this was the situation when I was in law school about 10 years ago.

As for the original question, I remember the prof. discussing this issue in my crim law class. Most students thought the acceptable probability was between 75-90%. I can't remember what I thought at the time, but I am probably closer to the high end of that range now. The consensus was that the criminal system was intentionally set up to be a PTB-style squishy definition rather than a defined probability. This contrasts with the civil verdict system, which everyone agrees requires nothing more than >.50.

I don't know if someone is actually suggesting that we ask each juror to assign his own estimated probability to his individual verdict, but I can assure you that most American jurors would not be able to grasp this concept. The real-world application of such a system would be laughably unworkable (e.g., jurors voting to convict while at the same time assigning their probability of guilt at 10%)
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.