Arguments, Stories and Criminal Evidence: A Formal Hybrid Theory (Law and Philosophy Library Book 92)

In this book a theory of reasoning with evidence in the context of criminal cases is developed. The main subject of this study is not the law of evidence but rather the rational process of proof, which involves constructing, testing and justifying scenarios about what happened using evidence and commonsense knowledge. A central theme in the book is the analysis of ones reasoning, so that complex patterns are made more explicit and clear. This analysis uses stories about what happened and arguments to anchor these stories in evidence. Thus the argumentative and the narrative approaches from the research in legal philosophy and legal psychology are combined. Because the book describes its subjects in both an informal and a formal style, it is relevant for scholars in legal philosophy, AI, logic and argumentation theory. The book can also appeal to practitioners in the investigative and legal professions, who are interested in the ways in which they can and should reason with evidence. Cover 1 Law and Philosophy Library VOLUME 92 3 ARGUMENTS, STORIES AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE 4 ISBN 9789400701397 5 Preface 6 Contents 8 1 Introduction 13 1.1 Rational Theories of the Process of Proof 13 1.2 Making Sense of Evidence 16 1.3 Reasoning with Evidence in Artificial Intelligence and Law 17 1.4 Research Goals 19 1.5 Book Outline 21 2 Reasoning with Criminal Evidence 23 2.1 Facts, Evidence and General Knowledge 23 2.1.1 Facta Probanda and Facta Explananda 24 2.1.2 Evidence 25 2.1.3 General Knowledge and Generalizations 29 2.2 The Process of Proof: Discovery, Pursuit and Justification 32 2.2.1 Investigation, Trial and the Process of Proof 35 2.3 Reasoning in the Process of Proof 36 2.3.1 Abductive Reasoning and Inference to the Best Explanation 37 2.3.2 Causal Reasoning with Evidence 39 2.3.3 Reasoning About Motives and Actions 41 3 Two Approaches to Reasoning with Evidence: Arguments and Stories 45 3.1 Evidential Arguments 46 3.1.1 The Structure of Evidential Arguments 48 3.1.2 The Dialectical Nature of Argumentation: Attack and Defeat 53 3.1.3 Generalizations and General Knowledge in Evidential Reasoning 58 3.1.4 Summary and Evaluation 65 3.2 Stories 69 3.2.1 The Causal Structure of Stories 71 3.2.2 Episodic Structures and Story Schemes 75 3.2.3 Explaining the Evidence 81 3.2.4 Choosing the Best Explanatory Story for the Evidence 85 3.2.5 Summary and Evaluation 89 4 A Hybrid Theory of Stories and Arguments 95 4.1 Combining Stories and Arguments 97 4.2 Evidential Support, Contradiction and Gaps 99 4.3 Story Coherence in the Hybrid Approach 101 4.3.1 The Plausibility and Consistency of a Story 102 4.3.2 The Completeness of a Story 104 4.4 Assessing and Comparing Stories 105 4.4.1 Comparing Stories 107 4.4.2 A Game for Inquiry Dialogue 110 4.5 Evaluation 112 5 A Formal Logical Hybrid Theory of Argumentation and Explanation 113 5.1 A Defeasible Logic 114 5.2 A Formal Theory for Argumentation 121 5.2.1 A Defeasible Logic for Evidential Arguments 121 5.2.2 Evidential Arguments 125 5.2.3 Attacking Arguments 128 5.2.4 Defeat and the Status of Arguments 130 5.3 A Formal Theory for Explanatory Stories 132 5.3.1 A Causal Theory for Explanations 132 5.3.2 Causal Stories 133 5.3.3 Stories as Explanations 135 5.3.4 Story Schemes 140 5.4 A Hybrid Theory of Argumentation and Explanation 144 5.4.1 Supporting and Contradicting Stories 145 5.4.2 The Coherence of Stories: Plausibility and Implausibility 148 5.4.3 The Coherence of Stories: Story Schemes and Completeness 150 5.4.4 Assessing and Comparing Stories 152 5.5 Dialogues About Proof 153 5.5.1 Framework for a Formal Dialogue Game 154 5.5.2 Players, Language and Moves 155 5.5.3 The Hybrid Theory in a Dialogue 157 5.5.4 Commitments 158 5.5.5 Comparing Explanations 159 5.5.6 Current Winner and Turntaking 161 5.5.7 The Protocol 163 5.6 An Example of the Dialogue Game 166 5.7 Evaluation 172 6 Case Study: Murder in Anjum 175 6.1 The Murder of Leo de Jager 176 6.1.1 Before the 24th: The Cannabis-Growing Operation and Bank Fraud 178 6.1.2 The Evidence in the Investigation into Leo's Death 179 6.1.2.1 Beekman's Testimonies 180 6.1.2.2 Waanders' Testimonies 181 6.1.2.3 Marjan's Testimonies 183 6.1.2.4 Other Testimonies: Kuilstra, Bregje and Aaltje 184 6.1.2.5 Police Reports: Blood Markings and Temazepam 184 6.1.2.6 Expert Reports: Autopsy, Toxicological Report and DNA Evidence 185 6.2 An Analysis of the Case: Constructing Stories and Arguments 188 6.3 Cause of Death, Murder Weapon and Leos State 190 6.3.1 The Murder Weapon 191 6.3.2 The Location Where Leo Died 198 6.3.3 Leo's Drugged State 200 6.3.4 Summary 201 6.3.5 Initial Evaluation 202 6.4 The Judiciarys View: Marjan Drugged and Killed Leo 205 6.4.1 Marjan's Motives for Drugging Leo 207 6.4.2 Marjan's Motives for Leo's Death 212 6.4.3 Leo's Death and the Events Afterwards 217 6.4.4 Summary of the Improved Judiciary's Story 225 6.5 Alternatives to the Judiciarys Story 227 6.5.1 Leo Took the Temazepam Himself 227 6.5.2 Beekman As the Killer 231 6.5.2.1 Beekman Killed Leo in the Early Evening 231 6.5.2.2 Beekman Killed Leo at Night 234 6.5.2.3 Beekman Worked Alone 235 6.6 Comparing the Alternatives 236 6.7 Evaluation 237 7 Related Research on Reasoning with CriminalINTbreak; Evidence 241 7.1 Reasoning with Stories 242 7.1.1 Bennett and Feldman and Pennington and Hastie 242 7.1.2 The Anchored Narratives Theory 246 7.1.3 Evaluation 250 7.2 Wigmore and the New Evidence Theorists 252 7.2.1 Wigmore and the Science of Judicial Proof 252 7.2.2 Modified Wigmorean Analysis 256 7.2.3 Evaluation 260 7.3 Theoretical Models of Inference to the Best Explanation 262 7.3.1 Thagard's Explanatory Coherence 262 7.3.2 Josephson's Logical Model of Abduction 263 7.3.3 Evaluation 264 7.4 Keppens and Colleagues Decision Support System for Police Investigation 266 7.4.1 Evaluation 267 7.5 Probabilistic Reasoning and Bayesian Belief Networks 268 7.5.1 Kadane and Schum's Analysis of the Sacco and Vanzetti Case 269 7.5.2 Bayesian Belief Networks and Sensitivity Analysis 271 7.5.3 Evaluation of Bayesian Approaches 274 8 Conclusions 277 8.1 Summary 277 8.2 Results 281 8.2.1 Reasoning with Criminal Evidence 281 8.2.2 Formal Theories of Defeasible Reasoning 284 8.3 Suggested Topics for Further Research 286 References 289 Name Index 297 Subject Index 301 940070139X,9789400701397 Springer 2011 Front Matter....Pages i-x Introduction....Pages 1-10 Reasoning with Criminal Evidence....Pages 11-31 Two Approaches to Reasoning with Evidence: Arguments and Stories....Pages 33-82 A Hybrid Theory of Stories and Arguments....Pages 83-100 A Formal Logical Hybrid Theory of Argumentation and Explanation....Pages 101-162 Case Study: Murder in Anjum....Pages 163-227 Related Research on Reasoning with Criminal Evidence....Pages 229-263 Conclusions....Pages 265-275 Back Matter....Pages 277-292