Distributed belief revision as applied within a descriptive model of jury deliberations

Belief revision is a well-research topic within AI. We argue that the new model of distributed belief revision as discussed here is suitable for general modelling of judicial decision making, along with extant approach as known from jury research. The new approach to belief revision is of general interest, whenever attitudes to information are to be simulated within a multi-agent environment with agents holding local beliefs yet by interaction with, and influencing, other agents who are deliberating collectively. In the approach proposed, it's the entire group of agents, not an external supervisor, who integrate the different opinions. This is achieved through an election mechanism, The principle of "priority to the incoming information" as known from AI models of belief revision are problematic, when applied to factfinding by a jury. The present approach incorporates a computable model for local belief revision, such that a principle of recoverability is adopted. By this principle, any previously held belief must belong to the current cognitive state if consistent with it. For the purposes of jury simulation such a model calls for refinement. Yet we claim, it constitutes a valid basis for an open system where other AI functionalities (or outer stiumuli) could attempt to handle other aspects of the deliberation which are more specifi to legal narrative, to argumentation in court, and then to the debate among the jurors.

Belief revision as applied within a descriptive model of jury deliberations

Belief revision is a well-researched topic within Artificial Intelligence (AI). We argue that the new model of belief revision as discussed here is suitable for general modelling of judicial decision making, along with the extant approach as known from jury research. The new approach to belief revision is of general interest, whenever attitudes to information are to be simulated within a multi-agent environment with agents holding local beliefs yet by interacting with, and influencing, other agents who are deliberating collectively. The principle of 'priority to the incoming information', as known from AI models of belief revision, is problematic when applied to factfinding by a jury. The present approach incorporates a computable model for local belief revision, such that a principle of recoverability is adopted. By this principle, any previously held belief must belong to the current cognitive state if consistent with it. For the purposes of jury simulation such a model calls for refinement. Yet, we claim, it constitutes a valid basis for an open system where other AI functionalities (or outer stimuli) could attempt to handle other aspects of the deliberation which are more specific to legal narratives, to argumentation in court, and then to the debate among the jurors.

The Jama legal narrative part I: The JAMA Model and narrative interpretation patterns

For the purposes of starting to tackle, within artificial intelligence (AI), the narrative aspects of legal narratives in a criminal evidence perspective, traditional AI models of narrative understanding can arguably supplement extant models of legal narratives from the scholarly literature of law, jury studies, or the semiotics of law. Not only: the literary (or cinematic) models prominent in a given culture impinge, with their poetic conventions, on the way members of the culture make sense of the world. This shows glaringly in the sample narrative from the Continent-the Jama murder, the inquiry, and the public outcry-we analyse in this paper. Apparently in the same racist crime category as the case of Stephen Lawrence's murder (in Greenwich on 22 April 1993) with the ensuing still current controversy in the UK, the Jama case (some 20 years ago) stood apart because of a very unusual element: the eyewitnesses identifying the suspects were a group of football referees and linesmen eating together at a restaurant, and seeing the sleeping man as he was set ablaze in a public park nearby. Professional background as witnesses-cum-factfinders in a mass sport, and public perceptions of their required characteristics, couldn't but feature prominently in the public perception of the case, even more so as the suspects were released by the magistrate conducting the inquiry. There are sides to this case that involve different expected effects in an inquisitorial criminal procedure system from the Continent, where an investigating magistrate leads the inquiry and prepares the prosecution case, as opposed to trial by jury under the Anglo-American adversarial system. In the JAMA prototype, we tried to approach the given case from the coign of vantage of narrative models from AI.

Film and literature in the legal classroom

The way in which law and lawyers are portrayed in popular film and literature is a fascinating subject not only for the social scientist but, more importantly, the lawyer and law student. Increasingly in law schools, films and classic literature with a legal theme are being used to identify various aspects of legal activity ranging from legal practice (i.e. intrinsic lawyer skills including legal argument, negotiation and advocacy) to various aspects of the legal process (e.g. the function of the judge and jury) as well as important elements of legal and ethical theory. This article focuses on the Law Through Film and Literature option which is offered to law students in the final year of their LLB (Hons) degree at Greenwich. The aim is to show how law-related film and literature can be a useful tool in the legal classroom, as well as providing some insights into how students have responded and developed as a result of their experiences on the course.