Applying statistics in the courtroom: A new approach for attorneys and expert witnesses

Applying Statistics in the Courtroom: A New Approach for Attorneys and Expert Witnesses

Volumn , Issue , 2001, Pages 1-295

  Good, Phillip I ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85057401388     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Book

References (97)

1. Aitken CCG (1995) Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists. Chichester:Wiley.
2. Angell M (1996) Science on Trial: The Clash of Medical Evidence and the Law. New York:Norton.
3. Anscombe FJ (1973) Graphs in statistical analysis. Amer. Statist. 27:17.
4. Babcock BA (1975) Voir Dire. Preserving its wonderful power. Stan. Law Rev. 27:545.
5. Babcock BA (1993) A place in the palladium: women’s rights and jury service. U. Cinn. Law Rev. 61:1139–1180.
6. Ball H (1986) Justice Downwind: America’s Atomic Testing Program in the 1950’s. Oxford University Press.
7. Barnes DW (1983) Statistics as Proof. Boston:Little Brown.
8. Beale S (1984) Integrating statistical evidence and legal theories in challenges to the selection of grand and petit juries. Law Contemp. Prob. 46:269.
9. Becker SJ (1991) Public opinion polls and surveys as evidence: suggestions for resolving confusion and conflicting standards governing weight and admissibility. Or. Law Rev. 70:463.
10. Berry DA (1991) Inference using DNA profiling in forensic identification and paternity cases. Statist. Sci. 6:175–206.
11. Berry DA; Geisser S (1986) Probability of paternity. In The Use of Statistics in Forensic Science, Aitken CGG; Stoney DA, Eds. Chichester:Ellis Horwood, 150–156.
12. Bierig J (1998) Methodological challenges to government sampling techniques. Health Care Fraud Abuse Newsletter. 1:7:1.
13. Boswell MT; Gore SD; Patel GP; Tallie C (1993) The art of computer generation of random variables. In Handbook of Statistics, 9, Computational Statistics, edited by Rao CR. Amsterdam: North Holland.
14. Broderick RJ (1992) Why the peremptory challenge should be abolished. Temple Law Rev. 369.
15. Carp RA (1982) Federal grandjuries: how true a cross-section of the community? Just. Syst. J. 7:257–277.
16. Cecil JS; Willging TE (1993) Court-Appointed Experts: Defining the Role of Experts Appointed under Federal Rule of Evidence 706, Washington, DC:Federal Judicial Center.
17. Chemerinsky E (1994) Civil rights: important decisions … but not dramatic. Res Ipsa 1:10–12.
18. Cleveland WS (1985) The Elements of Graphing Data. Monterey, CA:Wadsworth.
19. Cleveland WS (1993) Visualizing Data. Summit, NJ:Hobart Press.
20. Cochran WG (1977) Sampling Techniques (3rd ed.). New York:Wiley.
21. Coleman RF; Walls HJ (1974) The evaluation of scientific evidence. Crim. Law Rev. 276–287.
22. Converse JM; Presser S (1986) Survey Questions: Handcrafting the Standardized Questionnaire. Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
23. Cullison AD (1969) Probability analysis of judicial fact finding: a preliminary outline of the subjective approach. U. Toledo. Law Rev. 1969:538–598.
24. Dant M (1988) Gambling on the truth: the use of purely statistical evidence as a basis for civil liability.
25. Davis KC (1971) Discretionary Justice. Chicago:University of Illinois.
26. Diaconis P (1978) Statistical problems in ESP research. Science 201:131–136.
27. DiPrima SR (1995) Selecting a jury in federal criminal trials after Batson and McCollum. Colum. Law Rev. 95:888–911.
28. Duncan AJ (1986) Quality Control and Industrial Statistics (5th ed.). Homewood, IL:Irwin.
29. Dutka S (1982) The use of survey research in legal proceedings. ABA J. 68:1508–1510.
30. Evidence: admission of mathematical probability statistics held erroneous for want of demonstration of validity. (1967) Duke Law J. 665:675–678.
31. Farley; Mosteller F (1979) A conversation about Collins. U. Chi. Law Rev. 41:242.
32. Federal Judicial Center (1982) Manual for Complex Litigation ¶2.712, at 118.
33. Feller W (1968) Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications, 3rd ed. New York:Wiley.
34. Fienberg SE (1993) The Evolving Role of Statistical Assessments as Evidence in the Courts. New York:Springer-Verlag.
35. Fink A; Kosecoff B (1998) How to Conduct Surveys: A Step by Step Guide. Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
36. Finkelstein MO; Farley WB (1970) A Bayesian approach to identification evidence. Harv. Law Rev. 83:489.
37. Finkelstein MO; Farley WB (1971) A comment on “trial by mathematics.” Harv. Law Rev. 84:1801–1809.
38. Finkelstein J (1973) The application of statistical decision theory to the jury discrimination cases. Harv. Law Rev. 80:338.
39. Fisher (1980) Multiple regression in legal proceedings, Colum. Law Rev. 80:702.
40. Fisher RA (1934) The logic of inductive inference (with discussion). J. Roy. Statist. Soc. A. 98:39–54.
41. Freedman DA (1983) A note on screening regression equations. Amer. Statist. 37:152–155.
42. Freedman DA (1994) Adjusting the census of 1990. Jurimetrics J. 34:99–106.
43. Freedman DA (1999) From association to causation: some remarks on the history of statistics. Stat. Sci. 14:243.
44. Fukurai H; Butler EW; Krooth R (1991) Cross-sectional jury representation of systematic jury representation? Simple random and cluster sampling strategies in jury selection. J. Crim. Just. 19:31–48.
45. Gastwirth JL (1988) Statistical Reasoning in Law and Public Policy. Academic Press.
46. Gastwirth JL (2000) Statistical Science in the Courtroom. New York:Springer.
47. Gallant AR (1987) Nonlinear Statistical Models. New York:Wiley.
48. Goldstein R (1972) Interdistrict inequalities in school financing: a critical analysis of Serrano v. Priest and its progeny, U. Pa. Law Rev. 120:504, 423–525, nn. 67, 71.
49. Goldstein R (1985) Two types of statistical errors in employment discrimination cases. Jurimetrics J. 26:32–47.
50. Good PI (2000) Permutation Tests (2nd ed.). New York:Springer-Verlag.
51. Good PI (2001) Resampling Methods. (2nd ed.) Boston:Birkhauser.
52. Hamilton HG (1998) The movement from Frye to Daubert: Where do the states stand? Jurimetrics J. 38:201–213.
53. Harr J (1991) A Civil Action. New York:Random House.
54. Harrison J (1990) Peremptory challenges and the meaning of jury representation. Yale Law J. 89:1177–1198.
55. Hill AB (1971) Principles of Medical Statistics 9th ed. New York:Oxford University Press.
56. Kadane JB (1990) Statistical analysis of adverse impact of employer decisions. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 85:925.
57. Kalven H; Zeisel H (1966) The American Jury. Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 498.
58. Kaplan (1968) Decision theory and the fact-finding process. Stan. Law Rev. 20:1066.
59. Karys M (1977) Jury representativeness: a mandate for multiple source lists. Ca. Law Rev. 65:776–798.
60. Kaye DH (1986) Ruminations or jurimetrics: hypergeometric confusion in the fourth circuit. Jurimetrics J. 26:215–223.
61. Kaye DH (1986) Is proof of statistical significance relevant? Wash. Law Rev. 61:1333.
62. Kaye DH (1988) Plemel as a primer on proving paternity. Willamette Law Rev. 24:867.
63. Kaye DH (1989) The probability of an ultimate issue: the strange case of paternity testing. Iowa Law Rev. 75:75.
64. Kaye DH (1998) Bible reading: DNA evidence in Arizona. Az. State Law J. 28:1035–1077.
65. Keynes JM (1921) A Treatise on Probability. London:Macmillan.
66. Klein SP; Freedman DA (1993) Ecological regression in voting rights cases. Chance. 6:38–43.
67. Kleinbaum DG; Kupper LL; Muller KE (1988) Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariate Methods. Boston:PWS-Kent.
68. Kougasian PM (1993) Should judges consider the demographics of the jury pool in deciding change of venue applications? Fordham Urban Law J. 20:531–550.
69. LaFave W; Israel J (1984) Crim. Proc. 2:13.2(a), 160.
70. Lempert R (1991) Some caveats concerning DNA as criminal identification evidence with thanks to the Reverend Bayes. Cardoza Law Rev. 13:303–341.
71. Lempert R (1994) Suspect population and DNA identification. Jurimetrics J. 34:1–7.
72. Levin B; Robbins H (1983) Urn models for regression analysis with application to employment discrimination studies. Law Contemp. Prob. 46:246–267.
73. Meier P; Sacks J; Zabell SL (1984) What happened in Hazelwood; statistics, employment, discrimination and the 80% rule. Amer. Bar Found. Res. J. 139–186.
74. Meier P; Zabill S (1980) Benjamin Peirce and the Howland will. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 75:497–506.
75. Monahan J; Walker L (1985) Social Science in Law. Foundation Press, 211–212.
76. Mosteller F; Tukey JW (1977) Data Analysis and Regression. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.
77. Nietzel MT and Dillehay RC (1986) Psychological Consultation in the Courtroom. New York:Elsevier Science.
78. Note (1974) Height standards in police employment and the question of sex discrimination. S. Cal. Law Rev. 47:585.
79. Note (1966) Mathematical probabilities misapplied to circumstantial evidence. Minn. Law Rev. 50:745.
80. Paetzold RL; Willborn SL (1994 and updated annually) The Statistics of Discriminology: Using Statistical Evidence in Discrimination Cases. New York:Shepard’s/McGraw-Hill.
81. Parascandola M (1998) What is wrong with the probability of causation? Jurimetrics J. 39:29–44.
82. Peterson R (1982) A few things you should know about paternity tests (but were afraid to ask). Santa Clara Law Rev. 22:667.
83. Rabinovitch NL (1969) Studies in the history and probability of statistics XXII: probability in the Talmud. Biometrika 56:437–441.
84. Redmayne M (1998) Bayesianism and Proof. In Science in Court, Freeman M; Reece H (eds.). Brookfield MA:Ashgate.
85. Rubinfeld DL, Ed. (1991) Statistical and demographic issues underlying voting rights cases. Eval. Rev. 15:659.
86. Shroeder YC (1987) The procedural and ethical ramifications of pretesting survey questions. Amer. J. Trial Advocacy 11:195–201.
87. Shoben A (1978) Differential pass-fail rates in employment testing: statistical proof under Title VII. Harv. Law Rev. 91:793–811.
88. Smith RL; Charrow RP (1975) Upper and lower bounds for the probability of guilt based on circumstantial evidence. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 70:555–560.
89. Starr VH (1998) Witness Preparation. New York:Aspen.
90. Starr VH; Jordan WE (1993) Jury Selection: An Attorney’s Guide to Jury Law and Methods. Boston:Little, Brown.
91. Tribe L (1971) Trial by mathematics: precision and ritual in the legal process. Harv. Law Rev. 84:1329.
92. VanDyke JM (1977) Jury Selection Procedures. Cambridge, MA:Ballinger.
93. von Mises R (1928, 1957) Probability, Statistics, and Truth. London:MacMillan.
94. Whittaker J (1990) Graphical Models in Applied Statistics. Chichester:Wiley.
95. Ylvisaker D (1986) Comment: on blood test reports in paternity cases. In Statistics and the Law, Degroot M; Fienberg S; Kadan J (eds.). New York:John Wiley, 383–390.
96. Zeisel H; Kaye D (1997) Prove It with Figures: Empirical Methods in Law and Litigation. New York:Springer-Verlag.
97. Zumbo BD and Hubley AM (1998) A note on misconceptions concerning prospective and retrospective power. Statistician 47:385–388.