Burden of Proof: A Review of Math on Trial

Abstract

In "Math on Trial," Leila Schneps and Coralie Colmez write about the abuse of mathematical arguments in criminal trials and how these flawed arguments "have sent innocent people to prison" (p. ix). Indeed, people "saw their lives ripped apart by simple mathematical errors." The purpose of focusing on these errors, despite mathematics "relatively rare use in trial" (p. x), is "that many of the common mathematical fallacies that pervade the public sphere are perfectly represented by these trials. Thus they serve as ideal illustrations of these errors and of the drastic consequences that faulty reasoning has on real lives" (p. x). The author's strategy is to identify common mathematical errors and then illustrate how those errors arose in trials. They seek to accomplish two goals: first, to impress upon the general public the importance of being able to "distinguish whether the numbers brandished in our faces are legitimately providing information or being misused for dangerous ends"; second "to identify the most important errors that have actually occurred" so that such mistakes can be eliminated in the future.