Volume 48, Issue 4 (2018)
Experts, Inference and Innocence
A Symposium in Honor of the Work of
D. Michael Risinger
Part Two
Articles
Leveraging Surprise: What Standards of Proof Imply that We Want from Jurors, and What We Should Say to Them to Get It
D. Michael Risinger
The Declining Utility of Analyzing Burdens of Persuasion
Ronald J. Allen
Epistemology, Psychology, and Standards of Proof: An Essay on Risinger’s “Surprise” Theory
Michael S. Pardo
Common Sense on Standards of Proof
Kevin M. Clermont
Surprise vs. Probability as a Metric for Proof
Matthew Ginther and Edward K. Cheng
Debunked, Discredited, but Still Defended Revising State Post-Conviction Relief Statutes to Cover Convictions Resting on Subsequently Invalidated Expert Testimony
Edward J. Imwinkelried
Refryed Forensics: Screening Expert Testimony in Criminal Cases Through Frye Plus Reliability
JoAnne A. Epps and Kevin Todorow
The Science and Law Underlying Post-Conviction Challenges to Shaken Baby Syndrome Convictions: A Response to Professor Imwinkelried
Keith A. Findley and D. Michael Risinger
A Brief Comment on the Response By Professors Findley and Risinger to My Original Contribution to Professor Risinger’s Symposium
Edward J. Imwinkelried
Comment on Laudan
Roger Koppl
Reducing Error in the Criminal Justice System
Keith A. Findley
The Anti-Blackstonians
Marvin Zalman
Tradeoffs Between Wrongful Convictions and Wrongful Acquittals: Understanding and Avoiding the Risks
Paul G. Cassell
A Brief Reply to Professor Cassell
Marvin Zalman
An Introduction to Craig R. Callen’s Spotting a Preponderance of the Evidence in the Wild
D. Michael Risinger
Spotting a Preponderance of the Evidence in the Wild: Inference to the Best Explanation and Sufficiency of the Evidence
Craig R. Callen
Craig Callen on the Burden of Proof
Dale A. Nance
Explanations and the Preponderance Standard: Still Kicking Rocks with Dr. Johnson
Ronald J. Allen and Michael S. Pardo
The Persistence of the Probabilistic Perspective
Richard D. Friedman
Comments
