Work

Incorrect statistical reasoning in Guyll et al. leads to biased claims about strength of forensic evidence

Year: 2024

Type: article

Abstract: Guyll et al. (1) make an error in statistical reasoning that could lead judges and jurors in criminal trials to grossly misinterpret forensic evidence. Their error leads to highly inflated claims about the probability that a cartridge case from a crime scene was fired from a reference firearm, typically a firearm found in the possession of a defendant. These claims are being presented in at least one ongoing homicide case (2). We wrote a paper to address this error, summarized here. Some text below is excerpted from (3).

Source: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2315431121

Authors: Michael Rosenblum, Elizabeth T. Chin, Elizabeth L. Ogburn, Akihiko Nishimura, Daniel Westreich, Abhirup Datta, Susan Vanderplas, Maria Cuellar, William C. Thompson

Institutions: Johns Hopkins University, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, University of Pennsylvania, University of California, Irvine

Language: English

Topic: Legal processes and jurisprudence

Subfield: Law

Field: Social Sciences

Domain: Social Sciences

SDG: Peace, justice, and strong institutions

Open Access status: hybrid

OpenAlex ID: W4403824398

FWCI: 2.609

Cites: 9

Cited by: 1

Related to: 10