I do think that the legal standard of reasonable doubt means not assigning low likelihood charges. That’s how I understand the principle of “reasonable doubt”. The feature of this system it that it lets the jurors decide what they think reasonable doubt means and the system doesn’t set the meaning for it.
The system as I proposed by design doesn’t say “Prosecutors are only allowed to bring charges with at least X%” but works to let an equilibrium play out.
I think this feature is very neat because it’s a mechanism that doesn’t work through bureaucratic rules and arbitrary cutoffs but through jurors making decisions about what’s right in individual cases and the prosecutors learning from the judgements the jurors make.
I do think that the legal standard of reasonable doubt means not assigning low likelihood charges. That’s how I understand the principle of “reasonable doubt”. The feature of this system it that it lets the jurors decide what they think reasonable doubt means and the system doesn’t set the meaning for it.
Yeah, I agree with that. But 20% seems within that range for me (especially for very bad crimes). Is 10%? Not sure.
The system as I proposed by design doesn’t say “Prosecutors are only allowed to bring charges with at least X%” but works to let an equilibrium play out.
I think this feature is very neat because it’s a mechanism that doesn’t work through bureaucratic rules and arbitrary cutoffs but through jurors making decisions about what’s right in individual cases and the prosecutors learning from the judgements the jurors make.