Guilt In Criminal Cases

932 Words4 Pages
It’s amazing how quickly guilt can kick in for the smallest, most meaningless things in our lives. However, when you’re being accused of committing a crime, police officer or private investigator look for the slightest warning signs that would provoke them to investigate further. Wrongfully accusing people of committing a crime and using the Reid Technique on an innocent suspect to coerced confession is unethical. There has been many cases, involving innocent suspects falsely sentenced to jail or prison. Innocent people are often under attack and induced to confess to crimes they did not commit by deceptive, psychologically oriented method of interrogation. However, those who stand falsely accused often have faith that their innocence will…show more content…
Jeffrey Rosenthal is a professor of statistics, he computes probability and justice. He weighs evidence and uses beyond reasonable doubt to determine whether there is creditable information before charging the individuals, avoiding the risk of wrongfully convicting an innocent person. On June 18th 1964, in Los Angeles California, an elderly lady was pushed to the ground near an alley while grocery shopping. Her purse was snatched, she witnessed the robber as a young white women with a blond ponytail running towards a yellow car. Another witness named John Bass saw the driver as a black man with a beard and a mustache. An arrests was made Malcolm and Janet Collins were arrested by LA Police. Both eye witnesses could not make a positive identification so the prosecutor called a mathematic expert to calculate the probabilities Malcolm and Jenet Collins were involved. The mathematic expert used descriptive element assuming: a black man with a beard 1 to 10 ratio, man with mustache 1 to 4, woman with a ponytail 1 to 10 and yellow car 1 to 10 ratio, interracial couple in car 1 to 1,000, white woman with blond hair 1 to 3. The figures were multiplied and calculated 1 in 12 million Malcom and Janet Collins were the perpetrators based on the probability. (Rosenthal, 2014 ) A major illogical fallacy progressed the case to the Supreme Court, which later overturned the case due to improper use of math as evidence to determine guilt. A judge stated “we deal here with the novel question whether evidence of mathematical probability has been properly introduced and use (Rosenthal, 2014)”. The facts were properly introduced however, math probability should not determine a person life. Sold evidence and a fair trial is essential prosecutors are convicting an individual’s avoiding mistakes which potentially that
Open Document