5 found
Order:
  1.  62
    Reasonable Doubt from Unconceived Alternatives.Hylke Jellema - 2024 - Erkenntnis 89 (3):971-996.
    In criminal trials, judges or jurors have to decide whether the facts described in the indictment are proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, these decision-makers cannot always imagine every relevant sequence of events—there may be unconceived alternatives. The possibility of unconceived alternatives is an overlooked source of reasonable doubt. I argue that decision-makers should not consider the defendant’s guilt proven if they have good reasons to believe that plausible, unconceived scenarios exist. I explore this thesis through the lens of the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  2.  32
    Evaluating the Quality of the Deliberation in Moral Case Deliberations: A Coding Scheme.Hylke Jellema, Swanny Kremer, Anne-Ruth Mackor & Bert Molewijk - 2017 - Bioethics 31 (4):277-285.
    Moral Case Deliberation is an up and coming form of ethics support wherein clinical professionals deliberate about moral questions they face in their work. So far, it has been unclear what quality of deliberation in MCD is entailed and how to evaluate this quality. This article proposes a coding scheme that fits the theoretical background of MCD and allows researchers to evaluate the quality of the deliberation in MCDs. We consider deliberation in MCD to be of good quality when participants (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  3.  45
    The reasonable doubt standard as inference to the best explanation.Hylke Jellema - 2020 - Synthese 199 (1-2):949-973.
    Explanationist accounts of rational legal proof view trials as a competition between explanations. Such accounts are often criticized for being underdeveloped. One question in need of further attention is when guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal trials. This article defends an inference to the best explanation -based approach on which guilt is only established BARD if the best guilt explanation in a case is substantially more plausible than any innocence explanation, and there is no good reason to (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  4. Eyewitness evaluation through inference to the best explanation.Hylke Jellema - 2022 - Synthese 200 (5):1-29.
    Eyewitness testimony is both an important and a notoriously unreliable type of criminal evidence. How should investigators, lawyers and decision-makers evaluate eyewitness reliability? In this article, I argue that Testimonial Inference to the Best Explanation is a promising, but underdeveloped prescriptive account of eyewitness evaluation. On this account, we assess the reliability of eyewitnesses by comparing different explanations of how their testimony came about. This account is compatible with, and complementary to both the Bayesian framework of rational eyewitness evaluation and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  14
    Reasonable Doubt, Robust Evidential Probability and the Unknown.Hylke Jellema - forthcoming - Criminal Law and Philosophy:1-20.
    Most legal evidence scholars agree that proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt requires the belief that the defendant probably committed the alleged acts. However, they also agree that this is not a sufficient condition, as this belief may be unreasonable. I focus on two popular proposals for additional conditions: (i) that the degree of belief should be robust and (ii) that it should be reasonable given the available evidence (should be an evidential probability). Both criteria face difficulties regarding their (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark