A condition is that you must account for the fact that most (let us say 80% for the purposes of your calculation) persons convicted of a crime in a democratic society are in fact guilty of it
I’m curious where in the world you get this “fact”. I don’t believe that at all (and it seems essentially unverifiable). Also, remember that Knox isn’t a random person convicted of a crime: most of them don’t make international news. Also, Italy does not have the same rights and freedoms as the US: for instance, they don’t have separation of church and state.
The only test I can imagine is: when a new technique, like DNA testing, comes along, test a random sample of cases to which it is applicable. Unfortunately the cases re-examined are very carefully chosen, so no such information is available.
Thanks for that link. I don’t understand why the plea bargain rate is at all relevant. Prosecutors try to dispose of most cases through plea bargaining, and paying a fine may be cheaper than paying legal costs for many people who plead guilty. I don’t see any reason why an innocent person would be any less likely to plead guilty.
The innocence project focuses on high-profile murder and rape cases where DNA evidence can be obtained, so it’s very non-representative of the criminal justice system as a whole.
Also, this ignores the question of legal justifications and excuses, and other defenses like illegally obtained evidence. If, as a matter of fact, you killed someone, but the evidence was obtained illegally, and you’re still found guilty of murder, that’s still a wrongful conviction.
″....even if juries get it right only 80 percent of the time (an assumption at which most sensible scholars would cringe).… But the real wrongful conviction rate is almost certainly lower, and significantly so … ”.
I’m curious where in the world you get this “fact”. I don’t believe that at all (and it seems essentially unverifiable). Also, remember that Knox isn’t a random person convicted of a crime: most of them don’t make international news. Also, Italy does not have the same rights and freedoms as the US: for instance, they don’t have separation of church and state.
The only test I can imagine is: when a new technique, like DNA testing, comes along, test a random sample of cases to which it is applicable. Unfortunately the cases re-examined are very carefully chosen, so no such information is available.
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=14481
Thanks for that link. I don’t understand why the plea bargain rate is at all relevant. Prosecutors try to dispose of most cases through plea bargaining, and paying a fine may be cheaper than paying legal costs for many people who plead guilty. I don’t see any reason why an innocent person would be any less likely to plead guilty.
The innocence project focuses on high-profile murder and rape cases where DNA evidence can be obtained, so it’s very non-representative of the criminal justice system as a whole.
Also, this ignores the question of legal justifications and excuses, and other defenses like illegally obtained evidence. If, as a matter of fact, you killed someone, but the evidence was obtained illegally, and you’re still found guilty of murder, that’s still a wrongful conviction.
The part relevant to my earlier post was:
″....even if juries get it right only 80 percent of the time (an assumption at which most sensible scholars would cringe).… But the real wrongful conviction rate is almost certainly lower, and significantly so … ”.