{"id":16359,"date":"2024-04-05T13:41:00","date_gmt":"2024-04-05T12:41:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cassandravoices.com\/?p=16359"},"modified":"2024-04-05T13:41:00","modified_gmt":"2024-04-05T12:41:00","slug":"cassandra-voices-guilt-in-criminal-justice-i","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/casswp.eutonom.eu\/index.php\/2024\/04\/05\/cassandra-voices-guilt-in-criminal-justice-i\/","title":{"rendered":"Guilt and Innocence in the Criminal Justice System Part 1"},"content":{"rendered":"

I have just finished representing a client in a murder case and have plenty to reflect on about guilt and innocence. This is a two-part excursus for Cassandra Voices dealing first with why certain people are found guilty of crimes they did not commit.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Innocence Project<\/a><\/span>, with which I was involved over many years, has flagged the issue of cognitive or confirmatory bias, which often plays a crucial part in my closing speeches. The idea that we are liable to jump to conclusions based on pre-existing prejudices or our life experiences is as old as Dante or Francis Bacon.<\/p>\n

The idea explains why in natural justice terms the aphorism: justice must not only be done but be seen to be done, cautions against a decision based on the perception of bias, including objective bias. The crucial point is to be self-reflexive and to acknowledge shades of grey. Such is the path of wisdom \u2013 esteem nuance and not dogmatism. That is how to judge or be a juror, or even an investigative police officer, and not a persecutor.<\/p>\n

In terms of Confirmatory Bias Drs. Dror and Hampikian<\/span><\/a> of The Innocence Project have demonstrated that even when experts review a DNA test, if the police disclose which is the suspect\u2019s DNA profile, a favourable match to the evidence may be found.<\/p>\n

In a case study they conducted, two state experts who declined to exclude a suspect had information about his background. Whereas, when that same evidence was sent to seventeen out-of-state experts at another lab \u2013 who had no information on the suspect \u2013 twelve of the seventeen DNA analysts excluded the suspect from the inquiry, four deemed the matter inconclusive, and only one agreed with the original state police lab scientists that the suspect could not be excluded.<\/p>\n

We refer to this as confirmatory bias, and in my view it goes beyond police officers and social workers. It also seems to apply to pathology experts and forensic experts. The best are trained to understand such biases exist, and as one expert I recently cross-examined recently intimated, allow for a spectrum of doubt.<\/p>\n

\n

In our latest podcast Jim Sheridan discusses the Ian Bailey he knew, and explains why he was the perfect fall guy for the murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier.https:\/\/t.co\/KSml6eK3Qd<\/a>#ianbailey<\/a> #sophietoscanduplantier<\/a> #jimsheridan<\/a>#cassandravoices<\/a> #podcast<\/a><\/p>\n

— CassandraVoices (@VoicesCassandra) February 25, 2024<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n