Re:‘Serial’ case: Adnan Syed released, conviction tossed
by antognini on Monday September 19, 2022 @06:28PM
(#32904984)
Alexander Volokh wrote a tongue-in-cheek law review article titled "N Guilty Men" that tried to quantify that percentage:
Re:‘Serial’ case: Adnan Syed released, conviction tossed
by closewith on Monday September 19, 2022 @06:32PM
(#32905040)
It's obviously subjective, but a YouGov poll in the UK found that 47% of pelt required 99% accuracy or higher to be considered beyond reasonable doubt. Only 12% set the bar below 90%.
Source: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/1...
Re:‘Serial’ case: Adnan Syed released, conviction tossed
by ImprobableTruth on Monday September 19, 2022 @07:51PM
(#32905751)
20% said they would require 100% certainty, which is equivalent to stating that not even the most obviously guilty person in existence deserves to be convicted. I'd posit that this is more so evidence that the general population's knowledge of probability is abysmal.
Re:‘Serial’ case: Adnan Syed released, conviction tossed
by ip26 on Monday September 19, 2022 @08:23PM
(#32906005)
Or their concept of “certainty” or “doubt” is different from yours.
Re:‘Serial’ case: Adnan Syed released, conviction tossed
by ImprobableTruth on Monday September 19, 2022 @09:53PM
(#32906697)
I'm not even sure what that is really supposed to mean. If 100% precludes the potential of an event with infinitesimal likelihood (mass delusion, possession by ghosts, etc.), then as I said nobody ever gets convicted.
Otherwise, any "concept of certainty" that uses "100%" to refer to something that might not occur, is either gravely misusing mathematical notation or self-contradictory.
Re:‘Serial’ case: Adnan Syed released, conviction tossed
by Eisenstein on Tuesday September 20, 2022 @01:03AM
(#32907854)
While technically correct this is obviously not how people speak. If you ask someone 'what is the percent chance that drinking this glass of water I just got out of the tap in New York City will kill me within a few seconds?' They would respond '0%', even though by a mathematical definition that is not true.
Re:‘Serial’ case: Adnan Syed released, conviction tossed
by ImprobableTruth on Tuesday September 20, 2022 @07:31AM
(#32910332)
People generally consider context for their choice of words. Alongside 100% they were also given options such as 99.9999999%, it's clear that 100% in this case is not just used as "very likely".
Re:‘Serial’ case: Adnan Syed released, conviction tossed
by Eisenstein on Tuesday September 20, 2022 @09:03AM
(#32911081)
I didn't know they were given specific options.
Re:‘Serial’ case: Adnan Syed released, conviction tossed
by peteradio on Monday September 19, 2022 @08:13PM
(#32905931)
Can you statistically evaluate such a thing? Its all black swan.
Re:‘Serial’ case: Adnan Syed released, conviction tossed
by ImprobableTruth on Monday September 19, 2022 @09:48PM
(#32906665)
If you look at it in a bayesian way this is not an issue. "I can't put a number to it" would definitely be a legitimate answer, but "100%" is just wrong.
Re:‘Serial’ case: Adnan Syed released, conviction tossed
by indigodaddy on Monday September 19, 2022 @06:00PM
(#32904682)
I don’t disagree. I guess it’s kind of like an additional psychological bias that one plays into when he’s already been convicted and in prison.
Totally, but the standard for conviction is "beyond a reasonable doubt". By that standard, a 40% chance of innocence means "not guilty". I don't know whether the law has ever translated "reasonable doubt" into a specific percentage, but I have to imagine it's less than 10%?