What's wrong with it? This seems like an ok application of Bayes theorem.swampwiz said:Either that, or the author is a typical "pop scientist" author that doesn't understand probability too well.
https://nautil.us/issue/4/the-unlikely/the-odds-of-innocence
I think that is a good point. Probably the beat approach would have been to start with the “random male” number but add “convicted sex offender” as an additional explicit piece of evidence.mjc123 said:Specific: I'm not happy with the initial assumption of guilt of 1/200000. That seems to assume he was randomly selected from the local population to be put on trial, or at least to have his DNA tested, but that isn't the case. He was a known sex offender, and therefore likely to be of interest as a suspect, and his DNA was already on the database and found to be a match. He was not a random choice.
The likelihood ratio isn’t a probability because it can be greater than 1. It is the strength of the evidence. If you multiply the prior odds by the likelihood ratio then you get the posterior odds.FactChecker said:I would have to think about the defence's likelihood ratio argument. I have never seen a likelihood ratio interpreted as a probability. I think that may be an error. Or it may be using the term "likelihood" in a different context than I am used to.
A probability argument in a legal context refers to a defense lawyer's attempt to use statistical or mathematical principles to argue for the innocence of their client. This can involve presenting evidence or data to show that the likelihood of their client's guilt is low or that there is reasonable doubt in the case.
To determine the validity of a probability argument, it is important to consider the evidence and data presented by the defense lawyer. It is also helpful to consult with experts in the field of statistics or mathematics to evaluate the argument. Additionally, the judge and jury will ultimately decide if the argument is valid and if it holds weight in the case.
Yes, a probability argument can be used in any type of legal case where there is a need to assess the likelihood of a certain outcome or event. This can include criminal cases, civil cases, and even administrative hearings.
No, a probability argument alone is not enough to prove someone's innocence. It is just one piece of evidence that can be used to support a defense lawyer's case. Other evidence, such as witness testimony or physical evidence, may also be necessary to prove someone's innocence.
One limitation of using a probability argument in a legal case is that it can be subjective and open to interpretation. Different experts or individuals may have different opinions on the validity of the argument. Additionally, probability arguments may not always hold up in court and can be challenged by the prosecution or other experts.