Robust trust in expert testimony
Robust trust in expert testimony
复制标题
对专家证词的坚定信任
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Farhan Sarwar
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Christian Dahlman;Lena Wahlberg;Farhan Sarwar
刑事审判的举证标准应当要求检方提供的证据确实充分。这种稳健性要求表明附加信息不可能改变被告有罪的概率。法官很难估计稳健性，因为它要求法官评估他或她不掌握的信息可能产生的影响。本文关注的是专家证人，并提出了一种审查专家证言稳健性的方法。根据所提出的方法，从能力、动机、外部强度、内部强度和相关性方面评估专家证言的稳健性。对托马斯·奎克案的分析说明了信任不可靠的专家证词的危险。托马斯·奎克案是一桩瑞典法律丑闻，一名精神病院的病人因八起谋杀案被错误定罪。
The standard of proof in criminal trials should require that the evidence presented by the prosecution is robust. This requirement of robustness says that it must be unlikely that additional information would change the probability that the defendant is guilty. Robustness is difficult for a judge to estimate, as it requires the judge to assess the possible effect of information that the he or she does not have. This article is concerned with expert witnesses and proposes a method for reviewing the robustness of expert testimony. According to the proposed method, the robustness of expert testimony is estimated with regard to competence, motivation, external strength, internal strength and relevance. The danger of trusting non-robust expert testimony is illustrated with an analysis of the Thomas Quick Case, a Swedish legal scandal where a patient at a mental institution was wrongfully convicted for eight murders.