This study explains the correct method for the interpretation of DNA matches by using Bayesian Probability, and its various traps: the DNA fallacies. The current approach of the Court of Appeal to the use and presentation of DNA evidence is outlined. A new Bayesian Fallacy is explored. Specific focus is on Norman Fenton and Martin Neil's recent research (Fenton and Neil, 2000) which suggests a new dimension in the presentation of DNA evidence in court.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaldingD.J.DonnellyP. (1994) The prosecutor's fallacy and DNA evidenceCrim. L.R.711.
2.
EvettI.W. (2000) DNA profiling: A discussion of issues relating to the reporting of very small match probabilities. Crim. L.R.341, 353.
3.
FentonN.NeilM. (2000) The ‘Jury Observation Fallacy’ and the use of Bayesian Networks to present probabilistic legal argumentsMathematics Today, December 2000; An extended version of this paper is at http://www.agena.co.uk/talks/BBN_law_risk/index.htm.
4.
Home Office (1988) Entry into the Criminal Justice System: A Survey of Police Arrests and their Outcomes. UK Home Office Research Study 185.
5.
HonessT.M. (1988) Juror competence in process complex information: implications from a simulation of the Maxwell trialCrim L.R.763–73.
