A Scenario Approach to the Simonshaven Case

Abstract

In this paper, we present a scenario approach and apply it to the Simonshaven case. We offer an outline in which we spell out the core notions of the scenario approach. Next, we give a summing up of criteria to assess and compare scenarios. We use examples of the Simonshaven case to illustrate how the scenario-approach works. The last section contains a discussion of the main strengths and weaknesses of the scenario approach and a brief comparison with argumentationbased and probabilistic approaches.

Accountability in legal decision-making

“…Evidence that disproves one scenario may confirm another scenario. Furthermore, trying to find a good alternative scenario for the available evidence can also be considered part of attempting falsification (Van Koppen & Mackor, 2020).…”

Potential for police investigator bias: the impact of child sexual abuse victims’ background characteristics on perceived statement credibility, case outcome and quality of interview questions

“…biased/leading questions, during investigative interviewing. One potential way in which bias could be prevented is by using an alternative scenario model (Otgaar et al, 2017;Rassin, 2010;Van Koppen & Mackor, 2019). The alternative scenario model refers to the idea that police investigators should postulate at least two scenarios: one in which the assumption is that the allegation might be the result of a true memory, and another scenario that includes the hypothesis of a fabrication/false memory.…”

Test of the analysis of competing hypotheses in legal decision‐making

“…Several theories exist about how a decision is made in legal proceedings (e.g. Pennington & Hastie, 1988; Simon, 2004; Van Koppen & Mackor, 2019; Wagenaar, van Koppen, & Crombag, 1993). The reasoning processes undertaken by decision makers in criminal law proceedings are inherently cognitive processes, and subsequently, can be vulnerable to cognitive biases.…”