Slashdot Mirror
Programmed Sentencing in China
An anonymous reader writes to mention a unique combination of coding and social justice. A court in China has been using software to mete out sentences in criminal cases. The program has been in use for almost two years, and has passed judgement in some 1,500 cases. From the article: "'The software can avoid abuse of discretionary power of judges as a result of corruption or insufficient training,' the paper quoted Zichuan District Court chief judge, Wang Hongmei, as saying. But some Chinese newspapers criticized the move as a farce that highlighted the 'laziness of the court' and that would not curb judicial corruption as touted."
Would that be the same as a life sentence?
Oh wait....
Physics is nothing like religion. If it was, we'd have an easier time trying to raise money!
My understanding is this method won out over the Magic 8 ball or picking a fortune cooke out of a hat.
Cloud, silver lining, and all that.
while (thereAreCases()) {
defendant = defendant.getNext();
defendant.innocent = (defendant.powerful || defendant.powerful);
if (!defendant.innocent) firingSquad.add(defendant);
else firingSquad.add(prosecutor);
}
Have you read my journal today?
I just had this visual of this poor Chinese guy surrounded by a bunch of blinking screens, his hand hovering over a big red button, praying, "No whammies, no whammies!!"
a KILLER APP
I find this idea very scary...
We live in a world where we are all criminals. Don't think you break any laws? Think again. Everyone who is old enough to read this post has broken many laws in their life, even if they were minor laws.
When you live in a world where everyone is a criminal, the idea of a computer judge is very scary. The computer will not be able to make common sense decisions about what needs to be done to arrive at the judgement that is best for everyone.
In a world with imperfect laws, enforcing the laws perfectly is immoral, unjust, and IMHO, just insane.
'There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with'.
- Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged"
I am a viral sig. Please help me spread.
"It looks like you're trying to sentence someone. Would you like some help?"
It would be good to come up with (and make public) an algorithm for determining a sentence. It shouldn't automatically be entered as the official sentence, but then a judge would have a good baseline to go off of. If the judge wanted to make a significant increase or decrease to the sentence, they would need to demonstrate the extenuating circumstances. An added bonus is that there would be a quantitative metric for determining how judges are performing.
Of course, the toughest part is creating a fair algorithm. But hey, in theory it has got potential.
the software comments yuo out!
...but we call it electronic voting. The sentences have much bigger consequences, but are revised every four years.
(tongue firmly planted in cheek!)
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
A similar system has been in use in the Netherlands for some time. Not for judges, but for prosecutors. Most laws state e.g. that if you're guilty you "shalle be imprisoned for no longer than 10 years". Now, those maximum sentences are only applied if you've been a real asshole. If there are mitigating circumstances, you can expect some leniency. For example; you have no history of criminal behavior, you were provoked, etc. Those circumstances don't influence culpability, but they can influence sentencing.
To help prosecutors in demanding a punishment that fits the crime, and more importantly to have prosecutors demand the same punishment in similar cases, regardless of jurisdiction, there's a piece of software to help them out. Just enter the specifics of the case, and the software will work out the sentence you should ask for based on a) guidelines given out by the national government, and b) comparisons to similar cases from a historical database.
Now, the software just comes up with a suggestion, so the prosecutor can still say "well, in similar cases people have gotten 6 years in jail, but this guy's a real asshole based on characteristics I can't fill in on these forms, so he deserves to raise the average". Or the prosecutor can decide to stay on the lenient side. Whichever way though, if there's a discrepency from guidelines+case law, he'll have to explain it.
Now, ultimately, it's still in the judge's hands. The judge may attach greater weight to certain mitigating circumstances, and less to others, and come up with a different sentence. But the judge is also aware of the guidelines and statistics.
The reason for such a system is to increase the dependability of the judicial system. If two people commit the same crime, in the same manner, for the same reasons, and in the same circumstances, they should get the same punishment; justice, after all, should be blind.
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
How would the punishment of theft be related to the amount stolen?
linear?
quadratic?
logarihtmic?
If shoplifting a $20 "X" is a crime, when what about a CEO embezzling 100s of millions?
Firing squad for the whole family? Execution by worms?
Or what about murder? Even accidents involving negligence are punished... How should an army captain be punished? Or a police capatin?