Could Robot Judges Believe? Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial as we approach the Digital Age
Criminal proof is unique, in that it must be able to account for the justification of both: accurate fact-finding and a fair trial. This is Sarah Summers’ main message in her article on the epistemic ambitions of the criminal trial, which focusses on belief as a sort of proxy for societal acceptance...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Marcial Pons
2023-03-01
|
| Series: | Quaestio Facti |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/view/22849 |
| _version_ | 1797695555814555648 |
|---|---|
| author | Sabine Gless |
| author_facet | Sabine Gless |
| author_sort | Sabine Gless |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Criminal proof is unique, in that it must be able to account for the justification of both: accurate fact-finding and a fair trial. This is Sarah Summers’ main message in her article on the epistemic ambitions of the criminal trial, which focusses on belief as a sort of proxy for societal acceptance of truth as a set of facts established by compliance to procedural rules. This commentary tests her finding by scrutinizing whether it is conceivable that robots, complying to all rules, assist in fact-finding with a specific form of legal belief based on a sophisticated probability weighting opaque to humans. The result is in accordance with Sarah Summers: as long as robots cannot explain their beliefs, any criminal proof based on them flounders as it can neither be part of a fair trial nor ensure acceptance in the existing institutional framework. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T03:13:59Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-3c12a60ff0e54c048a5c34cc61d1d938 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2660-4515 2604-6202 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T03:13:59Z |
| publishDate | 2023-03-01 |
| publisher | Marcial Pons |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Quaestio Facti |
| spelling | doaj.art-3c12a60ff0e54c048a5c34cc61d1d9382023-09-03T14:12:43ZengMarcial PonsQuaestio Facti2660-45152604-62022023-03-01510.33115/udg_bib/qf.i5.2284910849Could Robot Judges Believe? Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial as we approach the Digital AgeSabine Gless0University of BaselCriminal proof is unique, in that it must be able to account for the justification of both: accurate fact-finding and a fair trial. This is Sarah Summers’ main message in her article on the epistemic ambitions of the criminal trial, which focusses on belief as a sort of proxy for societal acceptance of truth as a set of facts established by compliance to procedural rules. This commentary tests her finding by scrutinizing whether it is conceivable that robots, complying to all rules, assist in fact-finding with a specific form of legal belief based on a sophisticated probability weighting opaque to humans. The result is in accordance with Sarah Summers: as long as robots cannot explain their beliefs, any criminal proof based on them flounders as it can neither be part of a fair trial nor ensure acceptance in the existing institutional framework.https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/view/22849criminal proofrobot judgeslegal beliefparticipation rights in criminal trialsevidence lawelectronic monk |
| spellingShingle | Sabine Gless Could Robot Judges Believe? Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial as we approach the Digital Age Quaestio Facti criminal proof robot judges legal belief participation rights in criminal trials evidence law electronic monk |
| title | Could Robot Judges Believe? Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial as we approach the Digital Age |
| title_full | Could Robot Judges Believe? Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial as we approach the Digital Age |
| title_fullStr | Could Robot Judges Believe? Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial as we approach the Digital Age |
| title_full_unstemmed | Could Robot Judges Believe? Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial as we approach the Digital Age |
| title_short | Could Robot Judges Believe? Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial as we approach the Digital Age |
| title_sort | could robot judges believe epistemic ambitions of the criminal trial as we approach the digital age |
| topic | criminal proof robot judges legal belief participation rights in criminal trials evidence law electronic monk |
| url | https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/view/22849 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT sabinegless couldrobotjudgesbelieveepistemicambitionsofthecriminaltrialasweapproachthedigitalage |