Dial M for Murder: A Case of Passion Killing, Criminal Evidence and Sultanic Power in Medieval India

This paper considers the structures and applications of the criminal judicial system in the Islamic Later Middle Period as it developed in India under the sultans of Delhi (1200-1400 CE). A fundamental issue in crime and punishment is the relationship between sultanic power and religious authority. Particularly at stake in this relationship is the question of who can sanction the highest form of punishment, i.e. the death penalty (siyāsa). Contemporary historians and scholars in the study of religion investigating the relationship between sharīʿa and siyāsa to reveal the extent and limits of sultanic power show a system of governance that allowed for the delegation of authority, particularly in the area of the judiciary, from the sultan down to viziers and judges. Some scholars depict the relationship between the ʿulamāʾ and the sultan as a kind of stand off. The actual dynamics of legal jurisdiction were much more complex. This study proposes a new interpretive framework for understanding the relationship between political power and religious authority through a critical analysis of the criminal judicial system, law, and historical narrative. In particular, I consider a murder case described by Shams al-dīn Sirāj ʿAfīf in one of the most significant histories written in the later Delhi Sultanate, the Tārīkh-i Fīrūzshāhī.

The likelihood approach to compare populations : a study on DNA evidence and pitfalls of intuitions

The paper follows on from earlier work [Taroni F and Aitken CGG. Probabilistic reasoning in the law, Part 1: assessment of probabilities and explanation of the value of DNA evidence. Science & Justice 1998; 38: 165-177]. Different explanations of the value of DNA evidence were presented to students from two schools of forensic science and to members of fifteen laboratories all around the world. The responses were divided into two groups; those which came from a school or laboratory identified as Bayesian and those which came from a school or laboratory identified as non-Bayesian. The paper analyses these responses using a likelihood approach. This approach is more consistent with a Bayesian analysis than one based on a frequentist approach, as was reported by Taroni F and Aitken CGG. [Probabilistic reasoning in the law, Part 1: assessment of probabilities and explanation of the value of DNA evidence] in Science & Justice 1998.

The influence of supplementary health insurance on switching behaviour: evidence from Swiss data.

This paper focuses on the switching behaviour of enrolees in the Swiss basic health insurance system. Even though the new Federal Law on Social Health Insurance (LAMal) was implemented in 1996 to promote competition among health insurers in basic insurance, there is limited evidence of premium convergence within cantons. This indicates that competition has not been effective so far, and reveals some inertia among consumers who seem reluctant to switch to less expensive funds. We investigate one possible barrier to switching behaviour, namely the influence of supplementary insurance. We use survey data on health plan choice (a sample of 1943 individuals whose switching behaviours were observed between 1997 and 2000) as well as administrative data relative to all insurance companies that operated in the 26 Swiss cantons between 1996 and 2005. The decision to switch and the decision to subscribe to a supplementary contract are jointly estimated.Our findings show that holding a supplementary insurance contract substantially decreases the propensity to switch. However, there is no negative impact of supplementary insurance on switching when the individual assesses his/her health as 'very good'. Our results give empirical support to one possible mechanism through which supplementary insurance might influence switching decisions: given that subscribing to basic and supplementary contracts with two different insurers may induce some administrative costs for the subscriber, holding supplementary insurance acts as a barrier to switch if customers who consider themselves 'bad risks' also believe that insurers reject applications for supplementary insurance on these grounds. In comparison with previous research, our main contribution is to offer a possible explanation for consumer inertia. Our analysis illustrates how consumer choice for one's basic health plan interacts with the decision to subscribe to supplementary insurance.

Graphical probabilistic analysis of the combination of items of evidence

Unlike the evaluation of single items of scientific evidence, the formal study and analysis of the jointevaluation of several distinct items of forensic evidence has to date received some punctual, ratherthan systematic, attention. Questions about the (i) relationships among a set of (usually unobservable)propositions and a set of (observable) items of scientific evidence, (ii) the joint probative valueof a collection of distinct items of evidence as well as (iii) the contribution of each individual itemwithin a given group of pieces of evidence still represent fundamental areas of research. To somedegree, this is remarkable since both, forensic science theory and practice, yet many daily inferencetasks, require the consideration of multiple items if not masses of evidence. A recurrent and particularcomplication that arises in such settings is that the application of probability theory, i.e. the referencemethod for reasoning under uncertainty, becomes increasingly demanding. The present paper takesthis as a starting point and discusses graphical probability models, i.e. Bayesian networks, as frameworkwithin which the joint evaluation of scientific evidence can be approached in some viable way.Based on a review of existing main contributions in this area, the article here aims at presentinginstances of real case studies from the author's institution in order to point out the usefulness andcapacities of Bayesian networks for the probabilistic assessment of the probative value of multipleand interrelated items of evidence. A main emphasis is placed on underlying general patterns of inference,their representation as well as their graphical probabilistic analysis. Attention is also drawnto inferential interactions, such as redundancy, synergy and directional change. These distinguish thejoint evaluation of evidence from assessments of isolated items of evidence. Together, these topicspresent aspects of interest to both, domain experts and recipients of expert information, because theyhave bearing on how multiple items of evidence are meaningfully and appropriately set into context.

Olmsted, De Bow, and the Weight of Evidence on the American Slave South

Scholarship on the American Slave South generally agrees that John Eliot Cairnes's The Slave Power provided a highly biased interpretation of the functioning and long-term viability of the southern slave economy. Published shortly after the outbreak of the Civil War, its partisanship is partly attributed to its clearly stated goal to shift British support from the secession states to the states of the Union. Thus, it is generally agreed, Cairnes sifted his sources to obtain the desired outcome. A more balanced use of the sources at his possession would have provided a very different outcome. This paper will challenge this general assessment of Cairnes's book by examining in some detail two of Cairnes's most important sources: Frederic Law Olmsted's travelogues on the American Slave South and James D. B. De Bow's compilation of statistical data and essays in his Industrial Resources, etc., of the Southern and Western States (1852-53). By contrasting De Bow's use of statistical evidence with Olmsted's travelogues, my final purpose is to question the weight of evidence on the American Slave South. Cairnes aimed, I will argue, much more to balance the evidence than is generally acknowledged, but it is misleading to think that balancing a wide range of evidence washes out bias if this evidence itself is politically skewed, as is the rule rather than the exception.