Can criminal justice be predicted? Using regression analysis to predict judges' decisions on petitions for new criminal trials.

Predictability of legal decisions is usually considered a prerequisite for the rule of law, following the maxim 'like cases should be treated alike'. Yet, this presupposes that the case outcome can be predicted based on the merits of the case, rather than other factors. The purpose of this study was to test whether and to what extent legal decisions on petitions for new criminal trials can be predicted on the basis of other fairly superficial criteria that one could access without even reading the case file, e.

The role of alternative hypotheses in reducing bias in forensic medical experts' decision making.

Medical opinions are often essential evidence in criminal cases but relatively little is known about the factors that impact forensic doctors' decision making. This research examines the role and impact of having an alternative hypothesis while forming a medical opinion. A scenario-based experiment with forensic doctors (n = 20) was conducted.

Expert Reliability in Legal Proceedings: "Eeny, Meeny, Miny, Moe, With Which Expert Should We Go?".

Between Expert Reliability refers to the extent to which different experts examining identical evidence make the same observations and reach the same conclusions. Some areas of expert decision making have been shown to entail questions with relatively low Between Expert Reliability, but the disagreement between experts is not always communicated to the legal actors forming decisions on the basis of the expert evidence. In this paper, we discuss the issues of Between Expert Reliability in legal proceedings, using forensic age estimations as a case study.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Criminal Investigations and Proceedings in Sweden - A Snapshot of Practitioners' Realities.

Since well-functioning criminal investigations and proceedings are crucial parts of a society governed by the rule of law, it is essential to understand whether and how they are impacted by the current COVID-19 pandemic. The Swedish context provides an interesting case study and comparison to developments in other countries which have introduced more far-reaching interventions such as lockdowns. In this study, Swedish practitioners (N =10), including police officers, forensic pathologists, prosecutors, defense counsels and judges, participated in an online survey in which they gave their views on the pandemic's impact on their work situations.

The presumption of guilt in suspect interrogations: Apprehension as a trigger of confirmation bias and debiasing techniques.

This research tests whether a police officer's decision to apprehend a suspect triggers confirmation bias during an interrogation. The study also tests two strategies to reduce confirmation bias: (1) decoupling decision to apprehend from interrogation and (2) reducing cognitive load for the interrogating police officer. In Experiment 1, Swedish police officers ( = 60) were faced with 12 scenarios in which they either had to decide for themselves whether to apprehend a suspect or were informed about the corresponding decision by another police officer or a prosecutor.

A true denial or a false confession? Assessing veracity of suspects' statements using MASAM and SVA.

Previous research on statement analysis has mainly concerned accounts by witnesses and plaintiffs. In our studies we examined true and false statements as told by offenders. It was hypothesized that SVA and MASAM techniques would enhance the ability to discriminate between true and false offenders' statements.