Preventing Machines From Lying: Why Interdisciplinary Collaboration is Essential for Understanding Artefactual or Artefactually Dependent Expert Evidence

3Citations
Citations of this article
15Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This article demonstrates a significantly different approach to managing probative risks arising from the complex and fast changing relationship between law and computer science. Law's historical problem in adapting to scientific and technologically dependent evidence production is seen less as a socio-techno issue than an ethical failure within criminal justice. This often arises because of an acceptance of epistemological incomprehension between lawyers and scientists. Something compounded by the political economy of criminal justice and safeguard evasion within state institutions. What is required is an exceptionally broad interdisciplinary collaboration to enable criminal justice decision-makers to understand and manage the risk of further ethical failure. If academic studies of law and technology are to address practitioner concerns, it is often necessary, however, to step down the doctrinal analysis to a specific jurisdictional level.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wilson, T. J., Bergman, J., Jackson, A., & Popov, O. B. (2024). Preventing Machines From Lying: Why Interdisciplinary Collaboration is Essential for Understanding Artefactual or Artefactually Dependent Expert Evidence. Journal of Criminal Law, 88(2), 105–129. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220183231226087

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free