Koehler, J. J. (1991). The Probity-policy Distinction in the Statistical Evidence Debate. Tulane Law Review. 66, 141-150.

ABSTRACT

There is no room for a generic prejudice against the quantitative in our justice system. Like other types of evidence, statistical evidence can promote accurate fact-finding. When judges and juries are deprived of this information, errors may increase unnecessarily. On the other hand, some evidence--including some types of statistical or probabilistic evidence--is and should be withheld from juries for policy reasons unrelated to accurate fact-finding. This collision between that which promotes accuracy and that which promotes legal policy makes it difficult (if not impossible) to say which should prevail in any given case. But only those who understand the probative merits of the evidence, and who appreciate the probity-policy distinction, can make a fair judgment.