Modelling Legal Cases
نویسندگان
چکیده
Motives play an important role at every stage of a criminal investigation. They can be used to search for an explanation of the crime (why was this person killed?), to identify a suspect (who would have killed this person for this reason), and to persuade a jury of a suspect’s guilt (this motive explains why this person committed this crime). We have previously developed an account of motivations based on a general approach to practical reasoning. In this paper we will concentrate on the use of motives to provide plausibility to a story intended to persuade a jury of a person’s guilt or innocence. We will concentrate on a particular case study, formalised previously by Thagard, the two trials of Claus von Bülow. An advantage of our approach is that it allows stories to be considered from an intentional as well as a physical stance, whereas in previous accounts, including Thagard’s, only the physical stance is available. We show how our approach can be used to explain the outcome of both trials, and to identify the points in which the defence could be improved from the first trial to the second.
منابع مشابه
CLIME: Lessons Learned in Legal Information Serving
This paper presents lessons learned from the CLIME project (1998-2001), aimed at improving the access and understanding of large bodies of legal information through the Internet. Our approach involves explicit representation of the content of the legal sources consisting of three types of knowledge: (1) the domain being regulated (a domain ontology); (2) normative statements about the domain; (...
متن کاملOn Formalising Burden of Proof in Legal Argument
This paper investigates the modelling of burden of proof in AI & law models of legal argument. The main topic is how allocations of burden of proof determine the required strength of counterarguments. It is argued that the two currently available approaches both have some shortcomings. On the one hand, techniques for modelling burden of proof in nonmonotonic logics do not allow for shifts of a ...
متن کاملThe Effect of Formal Representation Formats on the Quality of Legal Decision-Making
Accessibility of legal sources is crucial to both jurists and citizens. As the development of E-government is speeded up the number of legal information systems including knowledge-based services is likely to increase accordingly. In the Program for an Ontology-based Working Environment for Rules and legislation (POWER) the Dutch Tax and Customs Administration (Belastingdienst) developed a form...
متن کاملPersuasion and Value in Legal Argument
In this paper we consider legal reasoning as a species of practical reasoning. As such it is important both that arguments are considered in the context of competing, attacking and supporting arguments, and that the possibility of rational disagreement is accommodated. We present two formal frameworks for considering systems of arguments: the standard framework of Dung, and an extension which r...
متن کاملDesigning a Modelling Methodology for Legal Workflows
This paper analyses the requirements that need to be met in order to provide a modelling methodology suitable for the modelling of legal workflows. It subsequently provides a methodology for the legal environment which meets the stated requirements.
متن کاملArgumentation Corner A formalization of argumentation schemes for legal case-based reasoning in ASPIC+
In this article we offer a formal account of reasoning with legal cases in terms of argumentation schemes. These schemes, and undercutting attacks associated with them, are formalized as defeasible rules of inference within the ASPIC+ framework. We begin by modelling the style of reasoning with cases developed by Aleven and Ashley in the CATO project, which describes cases using factors, and th...
متن کامل