PhilArchive
open access
Profile Evidence, Fairness, and the Risks of Mistaken Convictions
Many oppose the use of profile evidence against defendants at trial, even when the statistical correlations are reliable and the jury is free from prejudice. The literature has struggled to justify this opposition. We argue that admitting profile evidence is objectionable because it violates what we call “equal protection”—that is, a right of innocent defendants not to be exposed to higher ex ante risks of mistaken conviction compared to other innocent defendants facing similar charges. We also show why admitting other forms of evidence, such as eyewitness, trace, and motive evidence, does not violate equal protection.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Evidential Reasoning#88733
- More on Normic Support and the Criminal Standard of Proof#769017
- A Decision-Theoretic Framework for Comparing Likelihood Ratio Methods for the Rare Type Match Problem#1051615
- Parsing the Reasonable Person: The Case of Self-Defense#741653
- Honoring Margaret Berger with a Sensible Idea: Insisting that Judges Employ a Balancing Test before Admitting the Accused's Convictions under Federal Rule of Evidence 609(a)(2)#493756
Record · ID 720154
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive