Eugine_Nier comments on Hearsay, Double Hearsay, and Bayesian Updates - Less Wrong

47 Post author: Mass_Driver 16 February 2012 10:31PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (105)

Comments (105)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 16 February 2012 10:52:16PM 0 points [-]

There are good reasons to believe few trials that happen are extremely far from any kind of fairness, and they're stacked to give persecution an advantage. Just compare massive funding of police and prosecutors with puny funding of defense attorneys.

On the other hand, the prosecution needs to convince twelve jurors, the defense only needs to convince one.

Comment author: TobyBartels 03 March 2012 08:32:51AM *  0 points [-]

On the other hand, the prosecution needs to convince twelve jurors, the defense only needs to convince one.

Not necessarily. If the 11 and the 1 hold fast, then this results in a mistrial, not an acquittal; so really the defence needs to convince only 1 but every time, while the prosecution needs to convince all 12 but only once. (And in fact the 1 will be under enormous pressure from the 11 to convert before that point is reached.) ETA: Of course ‘every time’ is not forever; eventually the prosecution will give up.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit