Bayes’s Theorem and the Weighing of Evidence by Juries Philip Dawid University College London.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
New York State Police TrueAllele ® Casework Developmental Validation Cybergenetics © New York State DNA Subcommittee March, 2010.
Advertisements

The Use of Bayesian Statistics in Court By: Nick Emerick 5/4/11.
Chapter 10: Introduction to Inference
Juror Understanding of Random Match Probabilities Dale A. Nance Case Western Reserve University August, 2007.
Attaching statistical weight to DNA test results 1.Single source samples 2.Relatives 3.Substructure 4.Error rates 5.Mixtures/allelic drop out 6.Database.
In 1999, Sally Clark was convicted of the murder of her two sons. The data: In 1996, her first son died apparently of cot death at a few weeks of age.
THE RISKS OF LIFE Video Conference 5 Media & Misinformation.
Mathematical Ideas that Shaped the World Bayesian Statistics.
Chapter 7 Hypothesis Testing
9.4 t test and u test Hypothesis testing for population mean Example : Hemoglobin of 280 healthy male adults in a region: Question: Whether the population.
What Went Wrong in the Case of Sally Clark?
NC Court System.
Our goal is to assess the evidence provided by the data in favor of some claim about the population. Section 6.2Tests of Significance.
ICFIS, Leiden 21 August 2014 Norman Fenton Queen Mary University of London and Agena Ltd Limitations and opportunities of the likelihood.
Copyright © 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Pearson Addison-Wesley Chapter 20 Testing Hypotheses About Proportions.
Slide 1 PGM 2012 The Sixth European Workshop on Probabilistic Graphical Models Granada, Spain 20 September 2012 Norman Fenton Queen Mary University of.
Statistical decision making. Frequentist statistics frequency interpretation of probabilityfrequency interpretation of probability: any given experiment.
1 UCL. 14 Mar 05 UCL Monday 14 Mar 2005 Forensic inference – is the law a ass?  The Forensic Science Service 2004 Ian Evett Forensic Science Service.
PROBABILITY AND STATISTICS IN THE LAW Philip Dawid University College London.
Trial By Probability Bayes’ Theorem in Court. Presented By... Dave Bucheger Jill Thompson Sally Danielson Justin Koplitz Eric Hartmann.
Is it statistically significant?
The Investigation Phase Criminal Law and Procedure.
Chapter 4: Reasoning Under Uncertainty
MSc Methods XX: YY Dr. Mathias (Mat) Disney UCL Geography Office: 113, Pearson Building Tel:
Presented By: Syeda Saleha Raza. A young girl, Lulu, has been found murdered at her home with many knife wounds. The knife has not been found. Some bloodstains.
Section 9.2: What is a Test of Significance?. Remember… H o is the Null Hypothesis ▫When you are using a mathematical statement, the null hypothesis uses.
Fundamentals of Forensic DNA Typing Slides prepared by John M. Butler June 2009 Appendix 3 Probability and Statistics.
Chapter Seventeen HYPOTHESIS TESTING
Hypothesis Testing Steps of a Statistical Significance Test. 1. Assumptions Type of data, form of population, method of sampling, sample size.
Identification Evidence
Introduction to Hypothesis Testing CJ 526 Statistical Analysis in Criminal Justice.
Probability and Statistics of DNA Fingerprinting.
Statistical Inference Estimation Confidence Intervals Estimate the proportion of the electorate who support Candidate X Hypothesis Tests Make a decision.
Introduction to Hypothesis Testing CJ 526 Statistical Analysis in Criminal Justice.
Teaching Probability and Statistics to Law Students Philip Dawid University College London TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before.
The Inexpert Witness Born 1933 Distinguished paediatrician Famous for “Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy” Expert witness in cases of suspected child abuse and.
Statistical decision making. Frequentist statistics frequency interpretation of probabilityfrequency interpretation of probability: any given experiment.
Apr. 8 Stat 100. To do Read Chapter 21, try problems 1-6 Skim Chapter 22.
Chapter 8 Introduction to Hypothesis Testing
Presentation on Type I and Type II Errors How can someone be arrested if they really are presumed innocent? Why do some individuals who really are guilty.
Chapter 5 The Court System
Exeter University 10 October 2013 Norman Fenton Director of Risk & Information Management Research (Queen Mary University of London) and CEO of Agena Ltd.
Thinking About DNA Database Searches William C. Thompson Dept. of Criminology, Law & Society University of California, Irvine.
Week 71 Hypothesis Testing Suppose that we want to assess the evidence in the observed data, concerning the hypothesis. There are two approaches to assessing.
Bayesian vs. frequentist inference frequentist: 1) Deductive hypothesis testing of Popper--ruling out alternative explanations Falsification: can prove.
Bayesian Networks for Cyber Crimes. Bayes’ Theorem For an hypothesis H supported by evidence E: Pr(H|E) = Pr(E|H).Pr(H)/Pr(E) where – Pr(H|E) is the posterior.
Economics 173 Business Statistics Lecture 4 Fall, 2001 Professor J. Petry
Unit 8 Section 8-1 & : Steps in Hypothesis Testing- Traditional Method  Hypothesis Testing – a decision making process for evaluating a claim.
The Participants. Beyond a Reasonable Doubt Crown must prove case beyond a reasonable doubt: a reasonable person would have no choice but to conclude.
Type I and Type II Errors. An analogy may help us to understand two types of errors we can make with inference. Consider the judicial system in the US.
Statistics and the Law The case of the negligent nurse Willem R. van Zwet, University of Leiden Bahadur lecture Chicago 2005.
Slide 1 UCL JDI Centre for the Forensic Sciences 21 March 2012 Norman Fenton Queen Mary University of London and Agena Ltd Bayes and.
Sally Clark. Sally Clark (August 1964 – 15 March 2007) was a British lawyer who became the victim of a miscarriage of justice when she was wrongly convicted.
Bayes Theorem. Prior Probabilities On way to party, you ask “Has Karl already had too many beers?” Your prior probabilities are 20% yes, 80% no.
Chapter Ten McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. One-Sample Tests of Hypothesis.
HYPOTHESIS TESTING E. Çiğdem Kaspar, Ph.D, Assist. Prof. Yeditepe University, Faculty of Medicine Biostatistics.
FIXETH LIKELIHOODS this is correct. Bayesian methods I: theory.
How small probabilities affect our life?
Explaining the Likelihood Ratio in DNA Mixture Interpretation
The Criminal Justice Process
Procedures for a CRIMINAL case
Forensic inference – is the law a ass?
Statistical Tests P Values.
DNA Identification: Inclusion Genotype and LR
Forensic match information: exact calculation and applications
PSY 626: Bayesian Statistics for Psychological Science
Steps in a Criminal Case
The Participants.
The Participants.
Presentation transcript:

Bayes’s Theorem and the Weighing of Evidence by Juries Philip Dawid University College London

STATISTICS = LAW  Interpretation of evidence  Hypothesis testing  Decision-making under uncertainty

INGREDIENTS  Prosecution Hypothesis  Defence Hypothesis  Evidence

– or posterior odds:  BAYESIAN APPROACH  FREQUENTIST APPROACH – and possibly Find posterior probability of guilt: Look at & effect on decision rules

SALLY CLARK Sally Clark’s two babies died unexpectedly Sally Clark murdered them Cot deaths (SIDS)

POSSIBLE DECISION RULE OCCURS Can we discount possibility of error? — if so, right to convict CONVICT whenever

Alternatively… P(2 babies die of SIDS = 1/73 million) (?) P(2 babies die of murder = 1/2000 million) (??) BOTH figures are equally relevant to the decision between the two possible causes

BAYES: POSTERIOR ODDS = LIKELIHOOD RATIO  PRIOR ODDS If prior odds = 1/2000 million, Posterior odds = m ??

IMPACT OF EVIDENCE By BAYES, this is carried by the LIKELIHOOD RATIO  Appropriate subject of expert testimony?  Instruct jury on how to combine LR with prior odds?

IMPACT OF A LR OF 100 PRIOR POSTERIOR Probability of Guilt

IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE M = DNA match B = other background evidence Assume – “match probability” MP

PROSECUTOR’S ARGUMENT The probability of a match having arisen by innocent means is 1/10 million. So= 1/10 million – i.e.is overwhelmingly close to 1. – CONVICT

DEFENCE ARGUMENT  Absent other evidence, there are 30 million potential culprits  1 is GUILTY (and matches)  ~3 are INNOCENT and match  Knowing only that the suspect matches, he could be any one of these 4 individuals  So –ACQUIT

BAYES  POSTERIOR ODDS = (10 MILLION)  “PRIOR” ODDS  PROSECUTOR’S argument OK if Only BAYES allows for explicit incorporation of B  DEFENCE argument OK if

DENIS ADAMS –Match probability = 1/200 million 1/20 million 1/2 million  Doesn’t fit description  Victim: “not him”  Unshaken alibi  No other evidence to link to crime Sexual assault DNA match

Court presented with LR for match Instruction in Bayes’s theorem Suggested LR’s for defence evidence Suggested priors before any evidence

PRIOR 150,000 males in local area DEFENCE EVIDENCE B=D&A D: Doesn’t fit description/victim does not recognise A: Alibi

POSTERIOR Match probability1/200m1/20m1/2m Posterior

Trial –Appeal – Retrial – Appeal “usurps function of jury” “jury must apply its common sense” BAYES rejected – HOW? SALVAGE? 1.Use “Defence argument” 2.Apply other evidence

DATABASE SEARCH Rape, DNA sample No suspect Search police database, size 10,000 Find single “match”, arrest Match probability 1/1 million EFFECT OF SEARCH??

DEFENCE – (significantly) weakens impact of evidence PROSECUTION We have eliminated 9,999 potential culprits – (slightly) strengthens impact of evidence

BAYES  Prosecutor correct 1.Suspect is guilty 2.Some one in database is guilty Defence switches hypotheses – equivalent AFTER search – but NOT BEFORE Different priorsDifferent likelihood ratio – EFFECTS CANCEL!

CONCLUSIONS Interpretation of evidence raises deep and subtle logical issues STATISTICS and PROBABILITY can address these BAYES’S THEOREM is the cornerstone Need much greater interaction between lawyers and statisticians