exercise:84e5b5b6bf: Difference between revisions

From Stochiki
(Created page with "<div class="d-none"><math> \newcommand{\NA}{{\rm NA}} \newcommand{\mat}[1]{{\bf#1}} \newcommand{\exref}[1]{\ref{##1}} \newcommand{\secstoprocess}{\all} \newcommand{\NA}{{\rm NA}} \newcommand{\mathds}{\mathbb}</math></div> Probability theory was used in a famous court case: ''People v. Collins.''<ref group="Notes" >M. W. Gray, “Statistics and the Law,” ''Mathematics Magazine,'' vol. 56 (1983), pp. 67--81.</ref> In this case a purse was snatched from an elderly...")
 
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="d-none"><math>
Probability theory was used in a famous court case: ''People v. Collins.''<ref group="Notes" >M. W. Gray, “Statistics and the Law,” ''Mathematics Magazine,'' vol. 56 (1983), pp. 67--81.</ref>  In this case a purse was snatched from an elderly person in a Los Angeles suburb.  A couple seen running from the scene were described as a black man with a beard and a
\newcommand{\NA}{{\rm NA}}
mustache and a blond girl with hair in a ponytail.  Witnesses said they drove off in a partly yellow car.  Malcolm and Janet Collins were arrested.  He was black and though clean shaven when arrested had evidence of recently having had a beard and a mustache.  She was blond and usually wore her hair in a ponytail.  They drove a partly yellow Lincoln.  The prosecution called a professor of mathematics as a witness who suggested that a conservative set of probabilities for the characteristics noted by the witnesses would be as shown in [[guide:448d2aa013#table 4.4 |Table]].
\newcommand{\mat}[1]{{\bf#1}}
\newcommand{\exref}[1]{\ref{##1}}
\newcommand{\secstoprocess}{\all}
\newcommand{\NA}{{\rm NA}}
\newcommand{\mathds}{\mathbb}</math></div> Probability theory was used in a famous court
case: ''People v. Collins.''<ref group="Notes" >M. W.
Gray, “Statistics and the Law,” ''Mathematics Magazine,'' vol. 56 (1983), pp. 67--81.</ref>  In
this case a purse was snatched from an elderly person in a Los Angeles suburb.  A couple seen
running from the scene were described as a black man with a beard and a
mustache and a blond girl with hair in a ponytail.  Witnesses said
they drove off in a partly yellow car.  Malcolm and Janet Collins were arrested.  He was black and
though clean shaven when arrested had evidence of recently having had a beard
and a mustache.  She was blond and usually wore her hair in a ponytail.  They
drove a partly yellow Lincoln.  The prosecution called a professor of mathematics
as a witness who suggested that a conservative set of probabilities for the
characteristics noted by the witnesses would be as shown in [[guide:448d2aa013#table 4.4 |Table]].
<span id="table 4.4"/>
<span id="table 4.4"/>
{|class="table"
{|class="table"
|+ Collins case probabilities.
|+ Collins case probabilities.
|-
|-
|{\rm man with mustache}   || 1/4         \cr{\rm girl with blond hair} || 1/3         \cr{\rm girl with ponytail|| 1/10         \cr{\rm black man with beard} || 1/10         \cr{\rm interracial couple in a car} || 1/1000 \cr{\rm partly yellow car}    || 1/10   \cr
|man with mustache    || 1/4  
|-
|girl with blond hair || 1/3
|-
| girl with ponytail ||1/10
|-
|black man with beard || 1/10
|-
|interracial couple in a car || 1/1000
|-
|| partly yellow car || 1/10  
|}
|}


 
The prosecution then argued that the probability that all of these characteristics are met by a randomly chosen couple is the product of the
The prosecution then argued that the probability that all of these
probabilities or 1/12,00,00, which is very small.  He claimed this was proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants were guilty.  The jury agreed
characteristics are met by a randomly chosen couple is the product of the
and handed down a verdict of guilty of second-degree robbery. If you were the lawyer for the Collins couple how would you have countered the
probabilities or 1/12,00,00, which is very small.  He claimed this was proof
above argument?  (The appeal of this case is discussed in [[exercise:65ab35f324|Exercise]]).
beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants were guilty.  The jury agreed
and handed down a verdict of guilty of second-degree robbery.
If you were the lawyer for the Collins couple how would you have countered the
above argument?  (The appeal of this case is discussed in  
Exercise \ref{sec [[guide:A618cf4c07#exer 9.2.23 |5.1}.]].)


'''Notes'''
'''Notes'''


{{Reflist|group=Notes}}
{{Reflist|group=Notes}}

Latest revision as of 01:00, 13 June 2024

Probability theory was used in a famous court case: People v. Collins.[Notes 1] In this case a purse was snatched from an elderly person in a Los Angeles suburb. A couple seen running from the scene were described as a black man with a beard and a mustache and a blond girl with hair in a ponytail. Witnesses said they drove off in a partly yellow car. Malcolm and Janet Collins were arrested. He was black and though clean shaven when arrested had evidence of recently having had a beard and a mustache. She was blond and usually wore her hair in a ponytail. They drove a partly yellow Lincoln. The prosecution called a professor of mathematics as a witness who suggested that a conservative set of probabilities for the characteristics noted by the witnesses would be as shown in Table.

Collins case probabilities.
man with mustache 1/4
girl with blond hair 1/3
girl with ponytail 1/10
black man with beard 1/10
interracial couple in a car 1/1000
partly yellow car 1/10

The prosecution then argued that the probability that all of these characteristics are met by a randomly chosen couple is the product of the probabilities or 1/12,00,00, which is very small. He claimed this was proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants were guilty. The jury agreed and handed down a verdict of guilty of second-degree robbery. If you were the lawyer for the Collins couple how would you have countered the above argument? (The appeal of this case is discussed in Exercise).

Notes

  1. M. W. Gray, “Statistics and the Law,” Mathematics Magazine, vol. 56 (1983), pp. 67--81.