Subjectivity, algorithms and the courtroom

Algorithmic justice: Algorithms and big data in criminal justice settings

“…'Judicial opinions are themselves works of literature with rich hypertextual potential', claims Birkhold (2018). Also, we want empathetic judges (Plesničar and Šugman Stubbs, 2018) and not executory 'cold-blooded' machines. Criminal procedure has several conflicting goals.…”

“…Human empathy and other personal qualities that form part of flourishing human societies are in fact types of bias that overreach statistically measurable 'equality'. Such decision-making can be more tailored to the needs and expectations of the parties to a particular judicial case (Plesničar and Šugman Stubbs, 2018). Should not such personal traits and skills or emotional intelligence be actively supported and nurtured in judicial settings?…”

Artificial Intelligence and SentencingHumans against Machines

“…But in practice, this is difficult to assess: What is a proportional punishment? What is considered to be a just punishment is ambiguous and not universal: it is culturally dependent and subjective (Plesničar & Šugman Stubbs 2018). An evaluation of the severity of the harm that the offender caused by his crime requires an evaluation for which subjective sentiments like empathy and compassion are key.…”