Should statistics be used to evaluate the veracity of an alleged victims claims?

[you_with_the_face]

@Shodan

Since the alleged victim in the Duke University case was black, then statistically it would be better to assume that she was lying when she said that the only black person at the party was not the rapist.

I don’t see how you reach that conclusion at all. Why should she be suspected of lying simply because statistically most rape is intra-racial (which, as I pointed out, is mostly a by-product of acquaintance rape)? In a house full of strangers, there’s no (rational) reason to believe that the black guy is more likely to rape than the white guys.

[bup]

Statistics should not be used to eliminate likelihood of a crime by the cops - they would become self-fulfilling prophecies (and, in the case of murders, spouses/boy-girlfriends are already victims of that, I think).

Using Shodan’s strategy, society will always believe that white boys don’t rape black girls, because statistics preclude it.

For the defense, though - yes. Use statistics if you can. Benefit of the doubt goes to the defendant.

[you_with_the_face]

@bup

For the defense, though - yes. Use statistics if you can. Benefit of the doubt goes to the defendant.

How would the defense compellingly use stats to support their case?

[Lemur866]

@Ravenman

Yep. It’s not like the media hyped the possibility of a congressman having committed murder most foul. What a fantastic example of some stone cold, dispassionate, scientific analysis of statistical data to name the prime suspect in the absence of hard evidence.

Huh?

Yeah, he WAS the prime suspect. Being the prime suspect doesn’t mean we ship him off to prison without bother to collect more evidence or hold a trial.

But damn straight he was the prime suspect, and for very sound reasons.

[bup]

@you with the face

How would the defense compellingly use stats to support their case?

Maybe stuff like, “The L.A. police department taints data in more than 30% of investigations.” (made it up, but stuff like that)

And I meant it as more of a hypothetical, I guess. If the defense could make a compelling case. Of course, that begs the question of “what’s compelling?” If statistics make a compelling argument that…

Never mind. Don’t want to think that hard right now.

[bup]

‘data’ = ‘evidence’ :smack:

[Ravenman]

@Lemur866

Yeah, he WAS the prime suspect.

Now, this is going into hijack territory, but the Metropolitian PD repeatedly said that Condit was NOT a suspect. In any case, I think that the statistics of congressmen being involved in the disappearance of interns would tend to exculpate Condit, which is another great reason why this is a terrible example of statistics being a useful law enforcement tool.

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/people/shows/condit/profile.html

You might also want to consider that statistically, Richard Jewell made a great prime suspect for the Olympic bombing, a charge that was beaten to death in the press. Too bad he was completely innocent.