Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Philadelphia Courts Begin Using Computer Forecasts to Predict Future Criminal Behavior

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Philadelphia Courts Begin Using Computer Forecasts to Predict Future Criminal Behavior


philadelphia. cbslocal.com

PHILADELPHIA (CBS) — Judges in the Philadelphia court system are now taking advantage of powerful new computer models to help determine how much jail time an offender should get.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Who else is red in the face upon reading this? I'm not even American and it makes me want to move down there, apply for citizenship, then move to Philadelphia and run for office so I can ban this nonsense.


“It’s not an automatic sentencing project or anything like that,” she explains. “We’re just looking for additional sources of information in hopes that we get the sentencing right.”


Oh yes, you'd like to pass the buck of making tough and difficult decisions.

This is truly pathetic and terrifying if you ask me.

~Tenth

philadelphia. cbslocal.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


It sounds like they're using algorithms to determine the likelihood of the person repeating their crime....haven't we known the recidivism rates for certain crimes for quite some time? Seems to me one doesn't need a computer program to determine the likelihood of repeat offenders.

But I agree, the scary part is relying on a computer to make the decision. What happens if someone hacks into the system and changes the algorithms?

This smacks of zero tolerance policies, which I abhor.



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Like I pointed out here; what happens when someone being sentenced is a victim of identity theft?

Being sentenced to years in prison instead of probation for some petty crime would be one hell of a tough way to find out that somebody had stolen your identity and was using your name to write bad checks or something.

There's way too much room for abuse in the criminal justice system to begin with. Relying on soulless computers to determine sentencing just seems scary.



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 01:35 PM
link   
A computer algorithm might be much fairer than a biased judge in some cases, and point out something they might have missed.

The problem would be that judges would get lazy and start relying too heavily on the computers.

If they were only allowed to run it after they've decided on a sentence using their own noodle, I could accept that.

Also, I'm sure this could come in handy for defendants who want to appeal a sentence... They should be able to run the program against a judge's decision who is suspected of being biased.



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 02:32 PM
link   
I predict that the ACLU is going to challenge this and it will be thrown out as soon as they can get it heard.....

Although, it just shows how much as a society we are tied to our electronic world, kinda says something when even the government is relying upon technology to do things like this that aren't that hard for the human brain to do.


0111010001101000011010010111001100100000011010010111001100100000011100110111010001110101011100000110100101100100 (Translation: This is stupid)



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   
Great !

Now we can get rid of all judges and replace them with a computer program. With some luck, maybe in the near future we can eventually replace all lawyers too.

And then the politicians...

And then the bankers...

And last, but not least... the President !



Predicting human behaviour from flawed computer modelling programs... the world really has gone insane.



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 02:44 PM
link   
I'm really not seeing what you guys are so upset about.

First of all, many judges already have their own sentencing guidelines they follow for every case. Its a little hobby of mine to sit in court and watch sentencing and I've seen more than one judge say that they give an automatic sentence for this or that offense. So they are already doing this in some way.

Second of all, the article states that this is simply more information for the judges to use in their decisions. Why do you consider it a bad thing if they have access to more information about what are normal practices or rulings among their peers. It will help judges be a bit more consistent with their rulings. More information is always good.

Thirdly, I don't know of any judge that is going to follow a computer guideline and give up the power they have to determine people's fates. Its a power trip to them and I've seen them threaten people with what they could do to them if they wanted too and how they are lucky this judge is in a good mood today.

And finally, I really hate seeing judges let off rich people or celebrities with a slap on the wrist when all us normal folk get handed down stricter sentences. If we actually have access to this information also we will be able to raise a red flag and show how certain judges are using favoritism in their rulings.

I like this idea overall.



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 05:58 PM
link   
First of all this is unconstitutional, Yes unconstitutional,



Generally, due process guarantees the following (this list is not exhaustive):

•Right to a fair and public trial conducted in a competent manner
•Right to be present at the trial
•Right to an impartial jury
•Right to be heard in one's own defense
•Laws must be written so that a reasonable person can understand what is criminal behavior
•Taxes may only be taken for public purposes
•Property may be taken by the government only for public purposes
•Owners of taken property must be fairly compensated


www.usconstitution.net...

Computers are not humans they are not peers and that is why is can be considered unconstitutional under due process.



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 


to be honest, I was under the impression that "due process" is limited to the hearing and trial process, not the sentencing portion of a proceeding. they are considered two different phases in the entire process. evidentiary phase, jury phase, sentencing phase. I would think this would fall more under the 'cruel and unusual' punishment clauses. I don't see much distinction between using this program and using the "big book" that most lower-level prosecutors carry around with them that outlines sentencing guidelines.



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


They have already been using intelligent software to predict crime since, about 2007 if i remember correctly.
and no its not hocus pocus.



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   
double post - delete
edit on 2/8/2013 by VonDoomen because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by VonDoomen
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


They have already been using intelligent software to predict crime since, about 2007 if i remember correctly.
and no its not hocus pocus.


I agree. They don't need POWERFUL COMPUTER MODEL, they need software and above all - adequate database.



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 

It's amazing to me that our system has deemed various forms of human "profiling" (i.e. racial profiling, etc.) to be an inaccurate and dangerous practice, yet they condone the use of human-processed technology, an unthinking inanimate object that is only capable of making projections based on the same human input that has been deemed to be inaccurate and dangerous. So now judges need to merely push a button to make a life-defining judgement instead of taking that responsibility upon their own shoulders. How nice and cushy for them! Absolutely amazing (and disgusting...).



posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by timidgal
 


the difference is that technology can compute vast amounts of information with a much higher level of accuracy.

It would be really hard for you to hold that much information in direct attention and make accurate judgments about it.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 12:12 AM
link   
There really are very few truly abhorrent crimes that should not be tolerated anywhere. I don't see why as consenting adults violent people can't live with other violent folks, thieves among other thieves and let that be their tolerated community standard. Heavy boozing drunk drivers ought to be able to freely crash into each other, why not? And we should have room for a polite society as well. I just don't see the advantage of throwing people with wild desires into prisons when they should be free to act on their impulses, in the proper place and time. Birds of a feather, you know?

Justice should be making a place for everyone, and administration of justice about putting them in their place. Our grandest cities instead of being all about urban decay should have some of the highest standards, and the privilege of visiting them and participating in their offerings based on the willingness to uphold those standards. I don't have to agree with your lifestyle but damn sure respect your right to have it, though perhaps apart from mine.

We need to re-think "justice."



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Computers are as reliable as the human information that they feed in plain and simple, in lame terms they are as faulty as a human state of mind.

Remember who feeds the information and what kind, bias is always an issue then we most deal with misinterpretation of date.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Erongaricuaro
 


Lets open up Jurassic Park in Australia and let the rapists and murderers feed and tend to the animals.

Are you serious? How would you begin to contain and keep track of these people?



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 02:03 PM
link   
If you think that the attributes and the methodology will not be modified to ensure equal outcomes across demograph groups, you're crazy. Lets all take a look at the model, look at the suggested sentence and then the reality of the sentence and see if they even directionally correct.

You don't need sophisticated models. The attributes have been known for decades.

Born to a single mother with no education? 10 points
Over 20 with no work history? 10 points
No high school education? 10 points
Past run in(s) with the criminal justice system? 15 points
History of drug abuse? 10 points
Lives in a high crime neighborhood? 10 points
No outside interests, e.g. organized sports, music, art, volunteering, church, 5 points

Lets run the criminals through that model, which is highly predictive and see how that works.

The bottom-line is that the results will either be ignored or discounted either by simply over ruling the suggested sentence or manipulating the model to get a demographly consistent outcome.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 07:05 PM
link   
This is outrageous. I can't believe the ACLU, or sombody, isn't suing over this. If, and I mean a big if, they were even going to try to use a computer to determine anything, Maybe it would be at the phase where they consider parole (since parole boards suck at it anyway). But when you talking about sentencing, it should be based on the crime you already committed, and possibly your past crimes, NEVER your future crimes, and never by a computer!






top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join