Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Doctors and lawyers should get probability theory right
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
In a recent case of DNA evidence the probability of
a chance match was quoted as 20 million to one. The accurate
statement
that the defendant or two other unknown people in the United
Kingdom could have committed the offence
is much less impressive.
Other evidence was overwhelming, but this may not always be true,
especially with matches from DNA databases. Even more problematic than
the issue of presenting statistical evidence fairly is the problem of
getting it wrong.
On 9 November at Chester Crown Court Sally Clark, a Cheshire solicitor,
was convicted, by 10-2 majority, of smothering her two infant children.
With conflicting forensic evidence, the Crown's case was bolstered by
an eminent paediatrician testifying that the chances of two cot deaths
happening in this family was vanishingly small
1 in 73 million. This
seriously misunderstands probability theory. It is speculation whether
Sally Clark would have been acquitted without this evidence. But with
Read all Rapid Responses