find the latest legal job
Part Time Risk & Compliance Officer
Category: Other | Location: Brisbane QLD 4000
· Brisbane City · Flexible Part Time Hours
View details
Infrastructure Lawyer/SA
Category: Construction Law | Location: Sydney CBD, Inner West & Eastern Suburbs Sydney NSW
· Global elite law firm · Dedicated Infrastructure team
View details
In-House Legal Counsel (Mid to Senior)| Regulated Markets (Energy and Gas)
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Melbourne CBD & Inner Suburbs Melbourne VIC
· Full PD on Request · Exciting High Impact Role
View details
Family Lawyer
Category: Family Law | Location: Eastern Suburbs Melbourne VIC
· Boutique Firm · Great Reputation
View details
Infrastructure Lawyers
Category: Construction Law | Location: All Perth WA
· We'd be particularly interested to hear from you if you were a lawyer who knows your way around the infrastructure and energy sectors.
View details
Research reveals the problem with ‘overwhelming evidence’

Research reveals the problem with ‘overwhelming evidence’


A new study has suggested that total agreement between witnesses or overwhelming evidence in a court case should raise suspicions of bias and lower confidence in a result.

In a study to be published in The Proceedings of The Royal Society A, researchers found that unanimity should raise questions in situations where there is a lot of prior uncertainty. 

The paper shows, for instance, that a police line-up where victims all agree on the identity of an attacker is actually less likely to be correct than one where there is some disagreement between witnesses.

Similarly, a set of DNA samples that are all in perfect agreement could be evidence of an underlying systemic error.

Speaking with Lawyers Weekly, lead researcher Professor Derek Abbott, a physicist and electronic engineer at The University of Adelaide, said the study, while principally mathematical, was highly relevant to the legal profession.

Professor Abbott said the principle uncovered in the paper is not a new one and has been in the “collective subconscious of society” for some time.

One example of this, cited in the paper, is Jewish law in the classical era. As stated in the Talmud, defendants facing the death sentence were acquitted if all 23 judges (‘the Sanhedrin’) found them guilty.

“There is some evidence, like the Jewish [law] from centuries ago, that show that people have some inkling of this sort of thing because they would let somebody off being executed if everybody agreed that they should be executed,” said Professor Abbott.

“It seems counter-intuitive, it seems that defies logic, but it's also saying that perhaps if everybody is in total agreement there's been a collusion or a bias so you have to be careful of that.”

Professor Abbott said his research team were, however, surprised by their finding and branched into diverse areas, including law, as a “sanity check”.

“When something is counter-intuitive you try to apply it to something that is more familiar to people and see if it still makes sense,” he said.

But there are some obvious examples where this logic clearly holds, he continued. For instance, when a party receives 100 per cent of a vote in an election there is usually reason to suspect rigging.

“You can see that straight away,” he said. “If there is too much unanimity, there is something wrong.”

“So the next question you have to ask is, 'but hang on a minute, surely there are instances where unanimity is a good thing?’”  Professor Abbott continued. “That's right. You've got to distinguish the two cases.”

“If I have, instead of a police line-up, a line-up of bananas and one apple and a million people will come along one after another and say, ‘yep, that's the apple’, there will be no disagreement about that.

"It will be absolutely unanimous. That form of unanimity is correct. That's incontrovertible.”

The difference between this and a real police line-up is that there is prior uncertainty in the later scenario. According to Professor Abbott, the misidentification rate can be as high as 48 per cent in police line-ups.

“So that's almost 50 per cent – that's almost like tossing a coin,” he said. “So if you are expecting almost 50 per cent of the time that your witnesses should get it wrong, if 20 witnesses are all agreeing then that can't be right, because you are already expecting half of them to be wrong.”

The study, which is grounded in Bayesian analysis, could also hold for modern juries or even High Court decisions, according to Professor Abbott.

“If a case is unanimous, one has to then question why it is unanimous,” he said. “Is it because the case was a clear one or was it because there was some systemic bias there?”

Like this story? Read more:

QLS condemns actions of disgraced lawyer as ‘stain on the profession’

NSW proposes big justice reforms to target risk of reoffending

The legal budget breakdown 2017

Research reveals the problem with ‘overwhelming evidence’
lawyersweekly logo
Promoted content
Recommended by Spike Native Network
more from lawyers weekly
Law Council of Australia
Nov 21 2017
LCA calls for urgent adoption of ‘game-changing’ recommendation
The Law Council of Australia has urged for the immediate adoption of a key recommendation put forwar...
Sally Wheeler
Nov 20 2017
ANU College of Law appoints new dean
A distinguished legal academic and the former head of law of a higher education institution in Irela...
Nov 17 2017
It's time for politicians to commit to eradicating domestic violence
The national shame of domestic violence cannot be left unaddressed, writes Christine Smyth. ...
Allens managing partner Richard Spurio, image courtesy Allens' website
Jun 21 2017
Promo season at Allens
A group of lawyers at Allens have received promotions across its PNG and Australian offices. ...
May 11 2017
Partner exits for in-house role
A Victorian lawyer has left the partnership of a national firm to start a new gig with state governm...
Esteban Gomez
May 11 2017
National firm recruits ‘major asset’
A national law firm has announced it has appointed a new corporate partner who brings over 15 years'...
Nicole Rich
May 16 2017
Access to justice for young transgender Australians
Reform is looming for the process that young transgender Australians and their families must current...
Geoff Roberson
May 11 2017
The lighter side of the law: when law and comedy collide
On the face of it, there doesn’t seem to be much that is amusing about the law, writes Geoff Rober...
May 10 2017
Advocate’s immunity – without fear or without favour but not both
On 29 March 2017, the High Court handed down its decision in David Kendirjian v Eugene Lepore & ...