On 11 May 2019 at 8:25, Andres Valloud wrote:
How could the charges be structured so that the jury feels the most serious charge is overreach (lowest probability of conviction), but the less serious charge (highest probability of conviction) then seems reasonable? Doesn't that give the jury a low hanging fruit sense of accomplishment in administering justice because they eliminated the charges with lowest p-values?
What you're asking is a legal question, not a mathematical one, and it depends on the way a state's laws are written. Here in VA, the relevant statute says, in part, ยง 18.2-266. Driving motor vehicle, engine, etc., while intoxicated, etc. ... (i) while such person has a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 percent or more by weight by volume or 0.08 grams or more per 210 liters of breath as indicated by a chemical test administered as provided in this article, (ii) while such person is under the influence of alcohol, (iii) while such person is under the influence of any narcotic drug or any other self-administered intoxicant or drug of whatsoever nature ... and even by the most generous definition of "influence", passing out clearly fits the bill. And the defense lawyer *admitted* that (a) the accused had been drinking, (b) that diabetics are more sensitive to alcohol than normal and (c) that's what the situation was with his client. He has *admitted* that his client is guilty under condition (ii) [at least here in VA.
Doesn't that effectively guarantee a conviction of *something*, given enough charges?
This isn't a legal forum, so probably not worth discussing, but generally there are many "nested" offenses at question and the jury can, in fact, what "level" the accused might be guilty of, if any. [consider the tiers of murder, manslaughter, etc] /b\ Bernie Cosell bernie@fantasyfarm.com -- Too many people; too few sheep --