Calculating and understanding the value of any type of match evidence when there are potential testing errors

Artificial Intelligence and Law

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 1-28

  Fenton, Norman ^a,b   Neil, Martin ^a,b   Hsu, Anne ^a  

^a QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b Cambridge   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bayes; Evidence; Forensic match; Likelihood ratio

Indexed keywords

EID: 84894664325     PISSN: 09248463     EISSN: 15728382     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10506-013-9147-x     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. ABS Consulting (2002) Marine safety: tools for risk-based decision making, Government Institutes
2. AgenaRisk software (2013). www.agenarisk.com
3. Aitken CGG, Taroni F (2004) Statistics and the evaluation of evidence for forensic scientists, 2nd edn. Wiley, New Jersey
4. Aitken C et al (2011) Expressing evaluative opinions: a position statement. Sci Justice 51(1):1-2
5. Balding D (2004) Comment on: why the effect of prior odds should accompany the likelihood ratio when reporting DNA evidence. Law Probab Risk 3(1):63-64
6. Balding DJ (2005) Weight-of-evidence for forensic DNA profiles. Wiley, New Jersey
7. Bedford T, Cooke R (2001) Probabilistic risk analysis, foundations and method. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
8. Berger CEH, Buckleton J, Champod C, Evett I, Jackson G (2011) Evidence evaluation: a response to the court of appeal judgement in R v T. Sci Justice 51:43-49
9. Bex FJ, van Koppen PJ, Prakken H, Verheij B (2010) A hybrid formal theory of arguments, stories and criminal evidence. Artif Intell Law 18(2):123-152
10. Broeders T (2009) Decision-making in the forensic arena. In: Kaptein H, Prakkenx H and Verheij H, Ashgate (eds) Legal evidence and proof: statistics, stories and logic, p 71-92
11. Buckleton J, Triggs CM, Walsh SJ (2005). Forensic DNA Evidence Interpretation, CRC Press
12. Cowell RG, Dawid AP, Lauritzen SL, Spiegelhalter DJ (1999) Probabilistic networks and expert systems. Springer, New York
13. Cowell RG, Lauritzen SL, Mortera J (2008) Probabilistic modelling for DNA mixture analysis. Forensic Sci Int Genet Suppl Series 1(1):640-642
14. Dawid AP (2004) Which likelihood ratio (comment on 'why the effect of prior odds should accompany the likelihood ratio when reporting DNA evidence). Law Probab Risk 3(1):65-71
15. Dawid AP, Evett IW (1997) Using a graphical model to assist the evaluation of complicated patterns of evidence. J Forensic Sci 42:226-231
16. Dawid AP, Mortera J, Pascali VL, Van Boxel D (2002) Probabilistic expert systems for forensic inference from genetic markers. Scand J Stat 29(4):577-595
17. Dawid AP, Mortera J, Vicard P (2007) Object-oriented Bayesian networks for complex forensic DNA profiling problems. Forensic Sci Int 169:195-205
18. Evett IW, Weir BS (1998) Interpreting DNA evidence: statistical genetics for forensic scientists. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland
19. Evett IW, Foreman LA, Jackson G, Lambert JA (2000) DNA profiling: a discussion of issues relating to the reporting of very small match probabilities. Crim Law Rev (May) 341-355
20. Fenton NE (2011) Science and law: improve statistics in court. Nature 479:36-37
21. Fenton N, Neil M (2010) Comparing risks of alternative medical diagnosis using Bayesian arguments. J Biomed Inform 43:485-495
22. Fenton NE, Neil M (2011) Avoiding legal fallacies in practice using Bayesian networks. Aust J Legal Philos 36:114-150
23. Fenton N, Neil M (2012) Risk assessment and decision analysis with bayesian networks. CRC Press, Boca Raton
24. Fenton NE, Neil M, Lagnado D (2012) A general structure for legal arguments about evidence using Bayesian networks. Cognit Sci 37(1):61-102
25. Fenton NE, Berger D, Lagnado D, Neil M, Hsu A (2013) When 'neutral' evidence still has probative value (with implications from the Barry George Case), science and justice http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2013.07.002
26. Foreman LA, Evett IW (2001) Statistical analysis to support forensic interpretation for a new ten-locus STR profiling system. Int J Legal Med 114(3):147-155
27. Gigerenzer G (2002) Reckoning with risk: learning to live with uncertainty. Penguin Books, London
28. Gill R (2013) Forensic statistics: ready for consumption? http://www.math.leidenuniv.nl/~gill/forensic.statistics.pdf
29. Gittelson S, Biedermann A, Bozza S, Taroni F (2013) Modeling the forensic two-trace problem with Bayesian networks. Artif Intell Law 21:221-252
30. Hepler AB, Dawid AP, Leucari V (2007) Object-oriented graphical representations of complex patterns of evidence. Law Probab Risk 6(1-4):275-293
31. Kadane JB, Schum DA (1996) A probabilistic analysis of the Sacco and Vanzetti evidence. Wiley, New Jersey
32. Kaye DH (2009) Identification, individualization, uniqueness. Law Probab Risk 8(2):85-94
33. Kaye DH, Bernstein DE, Mnookin JL (2010) The new wigmore: a treatise on evidence - expert evidence. Aspen Publishers, Second Edition
34. Koehler JJ (1993) Error and exaggeration in the presentation of DNA evidence at trial. Jurimetrics 34:21-39
35. Koehler JJ (1996) On conveying the probative value of DNA evidence: frequencies, likelihood ratios and error rates. Univers Colo Law Rev 67:859-886
36. Koehler JJ (2012) Proficiency tests to estimate error rates in the forensic sciences. Law Probab Risk 12(1):89-98. doi: 10.1093/lpr/mgs013
37. Meester R, Sjerps M (2004) Why the effect of prior odds should accompany the likelihood ratio when reporting DNA evidence. Law Probab Risk 3(1):51-62
38. Morrison GM (2012) The likelihood ratio framework and forensic evidence in court: a response to RvT. Int J Evidence Proof 16(1)
39. Mortera J, Dawid AP, Lauritzen SL (2003) Probabilistic expert systems for DNA mixture profiling. Theor Pop Biol 63:191-205
40. Nordgaard A, Hedell R, Ansell R (2012) Assessment of forensic findings when alternative explanations have different likelihoods-"Blame-the- brother"-syndrome. Sci Justice 52:226-236
41. Puch-Solis R, Roberts P, Pope S, Aitken C (2012). Practitioner guide no 2: assessing the probative value of DNA evidence, guidance for judges, lawyers, forensic scientists and expert witnesses, royal statistical Society. http://www.rss.org.uk/uploadedfiles/userfiles/files/Practitioner-Guide-2-WEB.pdf
42. Queen Mary University of London, ERC Advanced Grant (2013) Effective Bayesian modelling with knowledge before data (BAYES-KNOWLEDGE) www.eecs.qmul.ac.uk/∼norman/projects/B-Knowledge.html
43. R v Adams (1996) 2 Cr App R 467, [1996] Crim LR 898, CA and R v Adams [1998] 1 Cr App R 377
44. R v T (2009). EWCA Crim 2439 www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2010/2439. pdf
45. Redmayne M (2001) Expert evidence and criminal justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford
46. Redmayne M, Roberts P, Aitken C, Jackson G (2011) Forensic science evidence in question. Crim Law Rev 5:347-356
47. Robertson B, Vignaux T (1995) Interpreting evidence: evaluating forensic science in the courtroom. Wiley, New jersey
48. Robertson B, Vignaux GA, Berger CEH (2011) Extending the confusion about Bayes. Mod Law Rev 74(3):444-455
49. Saks MJ, Koehler JJ (2007) The individualization fallacy in forensic science evidence http://works.bepress.com/michael-saks/1
50. Schum DA, Starace S (2001) The evidential foundations of probabilistic reasoning. Northwestern University Press, Evanston
51. Shaw A (2013) Do people trust Bayesian calculations better if they are shown a simple version first? MSc Thesis, University of London
52. Sjerps M, Berger C (2012) How clear is transparent? Reporting expert reasoning in legal cases. Law Probab Risk 11(4):317-329
53. Sjerps M, Meesters R (2009) Selection effects and database screening in forensic science. Forensic Sci Int 192(1-3):56-61
54. Taroni F, Aitken C, Garbolino P, Biedermann A (2006) Bayesian networks and probabilistic inference in forensic science. Wiley, New Jersey
55. Thompson WC (2008) The potential for error in forensic DNA testing (and how that complicates the use of DNA databases for criminal identification). In council for responsible genetics (CRG) National Conference: forensic DNA databases and race: Issues, Abuses and Actions, June 19-20, 2008, New York University http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/pageDocuments/ H4T5EOYUZI.pdf
56. Thompson WC, Taroni F, Aitken CGG (2003) How the probability of a false positive affects the value of DNA evidence. J Forensic Sci 48(1):47-54
57. Triggs CM, Buckleton JS (2004) Comment on: why the effect of prior odds should accompany the likelihood ratio when reporting DNA evidence. Law Probab Risk 3(1):73-82
58. Verheij B (2007) Argumentation support software: boxes-and-arrows and beyond. Law Probab Risk 6:187-208