Reducing Error in the Criminal Justice System

Findley, Keith A.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3175448

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some of his criticisms of Laudan are along the same lines as mine. See especially Findley (2018Findley ( : 1278Findley ( -1280 for an in-depth analysis of K-Z's study. 70.…”

Section: Appearance Of Guilt That Smacks Of the Arbitrarymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Laudan’s error: Reasonable doubt and acquittals of guilty people

Vecchi

2020

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt (BARD) is one of the most fundamental requirements of American criminal law and other legal systems. Professor Larry Laudan has criticised this requirement for several reasons. His main contention is that the BARD formula converts evidential support into subjective confidence, and is therefore not a genuine standard of proof. At the same time, Laudan holds that BARD produces a large number of guilty defendant’s acquittals due to its excessive demand for evidence. The aim of this article is to show that Laudan’s argument regarding the number of guilty defendant’s acquittals is unacceptable. Perhaps the real ratio of false negatives to false positives were what Laudan holds them to be, yet he fails to provide any suitable argument to support his claim, or to attribute the alleged frequency of errors to a particular standard of proof—BARD or otherwise.

show abstract

“…Some of his criticisms of Laudan are along the same lines as mine. See especially Findley (2018Findley ( : 1278Findley ( -1280 for an in-depth analysis of K-Z's study. 70.…”

Section: Appearance Of Guilt That Smacks Of the Arbitrarymentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 22. While working on this paper, Findley’s 2018 article came into my hands. Some of his criticisms of Laudan are along the same lines as mine.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Laudan’s error: Reasonable doubt and acquittals of guilty people

Vecchi

2020

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Crime without punishment, or at least the threat of punishment, maybe impractical, but it is not illogical [1]. "The reason for punishment listed above fall into two groups: those which concern with preventing future crimes, and those which concern with punishing what was already committed (or past crimes) [1]. The essence of punishment for moral delinquency lies in the criminal conviction itself.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contribution of Restorative Justice Practice in Baduy’s Culture Criminal Justice System Reform

UmiRozah¹

2019

Proceedings of the the First International Conference on Islamic Development Studies 2019, ICIDS 2019, 10 September 2019, Banda

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Criminal justice system emphasizes on an offender-oriented paradigm, such as how to impose an appropriate and a fair punishment to the offender. On the other hand, the victim has no right in the criminal justice system, with a unique role as the key witness. This article based on research which had performed in Baduy, Banten-Tangerang Indonesia. This research rests on the socio-legal research approach by using hermeneutics philosophy. The research outcomes are as follows: The values contented on restorative justice practice in Baduy's culture can be identified within criminal justice process, such as 1) Victim and his/her family have a position similar with offender in the adjudication process; 2) All process in the adjudication aims to restore all damages and injuries, to restore and clean up of the offender's inner, and to restore peace, cosmos, and social re-cohesion; 3.All process will end with restitution, forgiveness, and punishment, if the conference could proof the offense and blameworthiness of the offender. Criminal Justice System applied in Indonesia today is based on the old concept, which only focuses on the offender and less to the victim. Restorative justice practices in Baduy culture can be applied in the adjudication. There are two types of adjudications in criminal cases: family conference and the Customary Criminal Court. All types of adjudication have to involve the victim and his/her family. This restorative justice concept can be applied in criminal justice system reform to achieve substantive justice for all parties.

show abstract

“… 30. Contrast Laudan’s long-running campaign against false acquittals with this from a Findley pre-print on false convictions: ‘…what we should not do is abandon fundamental principles like the reasonable doubt standard that so thoroughly reflect who we are as a society, and thereby inevitably create a sad and wholly unnecessary trade-off—sacrificing even more innocent people to make the rest of us feel marginally safer’ (Findley, 2018). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Killing Kaplanism: Flawed methodologies, the standard of proof and modernity

Bown¹

2018

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attempts to establish a quantitative framework for policy-making in the criminal justice system in recent decades have coalesced around the problem of the standard of proof and Kaplan’s influential 1968 paper. The central thread of work continues to use an equation he put forward while abandoning some of his foundational assumptions, an approach I call ‘Kaplanism’. Despite a growing awareness of deficiencies, elements of this school of thought, such as the parsing of concerns into the two categories of ‘error reduction’ and ‘error distribution’, have entered the general jurisprudential discourse. Here I launch a methodological attack and claim to kill this approach. This allows me to refute Laudan and other ‘consequentialist’ approaches to the standard identified by Walen, Walen’s own approach and an important part of Stein’s underpinnings. The same tools allow me to also refute Laudan’s earlier m/n meta-epistemology, Lippke’s ‘adage’, Stewart’s formalisation of Dworkin, Dahlman’s Bayesian work and (at least in criminal law) Kaplow’s law and economics approach. I also refute Hamer’s ‘conventional rationale’ for the current standard, Lillquist’s approach to the same and what Epps reports as ‘the Blackstone principle’. The law is left with no epistemic basis for policies, which, I argue, leaves it struggling for public trust in the modern era.

show abstract

Reducing Error in the Criminal Justice System

Abstract: , and participants in the University of Wisconsin Law School faculty scholarship workshop for their invaluable feedback on a draft of this article.

Cited by 3 publications

References 15 publications

Laudan’s error: Reasonable doubt and acquittals of guilty people

Laudan’s error: Reasonable doubt and acquittals of guilty people

Contribution of Restorative Justice Practice in Baduy’s Culture Criminal Justice System Reform

Killing Kaplanism: Flawed methodologies, the standard of proof and modernity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About