References
Primary Legal Sources
- Boardman v DPP [1975] AC 421; [1974] 3 All ER 887.
- DPP v P [1991] 2 AC 447; [1991] 3 All ER 337.
- Harriman v R. (1989) 167 CLR 590; [1989] HCA 50.
- Lowery v The Queen [1974] AC 85.
- Makin v Attorney-General (NSW) [1894] AC 57; [1891-4] All ER 24 (PC).
- Perry v R (1982) 150 CLR 580; [1982] HCA 75.
- Pfennig v R (1995) 182 CLR 461; 127 ALR 99; 69 ALJR 147; [1995] HCA 7.
- Phillips v R (2006) 225 CLR 303; 224 ALR 216; [2006] HCA 4.
- R v Butler (1986) 84 Cr App R 12.
- R v O’Keefe [2000] 1 Qd R 564; [1999] QCA 50.
- R v PS [2004] QCA 347.
- R v Randall [2004] 1 Cr App R 26; [2004] 1 WLR 56; [2003] UKHL 69.
- Smith v R (1916) 11 Cr App R 229.
- Sutton v The Queen (1984) 152 CLR 528; [1984] HCA 5.
- Velkowski v The Queen [2014] VSCA 121.
Secondary Sources
- Tony Abbott (2015) Martin Place Siege Review Released, Office of the Prime Minister.
- Barrett J. Anderson (2012) ‘Recognizing Character: A New Perspective on Character Evidence’ 121 Yale Law Journal 1912.
- Australian Law Reform Commission (1985) Interim Report on Evidence.
- Australian Law Reform Commission (2006) Report on the Uniform Evidence Law.
- A. K. Barbey and S. A. Sloman (2007) ‘Base-rate Respect: From Ecological Rationality to Dual Processes’ 30 Behavioral and Brain Sciences 241.
- M. Bar-Hillel (1980) ‘The Base Rate Fallacy in Probability Judgments’ 44 Acta Psychologica 211. doi: 10.1016/0001-6918(80)90046-3
- Riccardo Bellazzi and Blaz Zupan (2008) ‘Predictive Data Mining in Clinical Medicine: Current Issues and Guidelines’ 77 International Journal of Medical Informatics 81. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2006.11.006
- R. Beyth-Marom (1981) The Subjective Probability of Conjunctions, Decision Research Institute Report no. 81-12.
- Annie Cossins (2011a) ‘Similar Facts and Consent in Sexual Assault Cases: Filling in the Gap Left by the High Court in Phillips’ 37(2) Monash Law Review 47.
- Annie Cossins (2011b) ‘The Behaviour of Serial Child Sex Offenders: Implications for the Prosecution of Child Sex Offences in Joint Trials’ 35 Melbourne University Law Review 821
- Annie Cossins (2013a) The Baby Farmers, Allen & Unwin.
- Annie Cossins (2013b) ‘The Legacy of the Makin Case 120 Years On: Legal Fictions, Circular Reasoning and Some Solutions’ 35 Sydney Law Review 731.
- Fintan Costello and Paul Watts (2014) ‘Surprisingly Rational: Probability Theory Plus Noise Explains Biases in Judgment’ 121 Psychological Review 463. doi: 10.1037/a0037010
- Emma Cunliffe (2014) ‘Judging, Fast and Slow: Using Decision-Making Theory to Explore Judicial Fact Determination’ 18 International Journal of Evidence and Proof 139. doi: 10.1350/ijep.2014.18.2.447
- Raylene D’Cruz (2013) ‘New Views on Criminal Justice’ 33 Proctor 28.
- Dennis J. Devine (2012) Jury Decision Making: The State of the Science, New York University Press.
- Michelle Edgely (2007) ‘Preventing Crime or Punishing Propensities? A Purposive Examination of the Preventative Detention of Sex Offenders in Queensland and Western Australia’ 33 University of Western Australia Law Review 351.
- Theodore Eisenberg and Valerie P. Hans (2009) ‘Taking a Stand on Taking the Stand: The Effect of a Prior Criminal Record on the Decision to Testify and On Trial Outcomes’ 94 Cornell Law Review 1353.
- S. Epstein (1994) ‘Integration of the Cognitive and the Psychodynamic Unconscious’ 49 American Psychologist 709. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.49.8.709
- William Fairley (1973) ‘Probabistic Analysis of Identification Evidence’ 2 Journal of Legal Studies 493. doi: 10.1086/467506
- William Fairley and Robert Mosteller (1974) ‘A Conversation about Collins’ 41 University of Chicago Law Review 242. doi: 10.2307/1599147
- Aidan Feeney et al (2007) ‘Who is Susceptible to Conjunction Fallacies in Category-based Induction?’ 14 Psychological Bulletin & Review 884. doi: 10.3758/BF03194116
- Michael Finkelstein and William Fairley (1970) ‘A Bayesian Approach to Identification Evidence’ 83 Harvard Law Review 489. doi: 10.2307/1339656
- Michael Finkelstein and William Fairley (1971) ‘The Continuing Debate Over Mathematics in the Law of Evidence: A Comment on “Trial by Mathematics”’ 84 Harvard Law Review 1801. doi: 10.2307/1339569
- B. Fischhoff (1985) Judging Unlikely Conjunctions, Decision Research Institute Report no. 85-2.
- Jeremy Gans (2006) ‘Similar Facts After Phillips’ 30 Criminal Law Journal 224.
- Jeremy Gans and Andrew Palmer (2014) Uniform Evidence, 2nd edn, Oxford University Press.
- Igor Gavanski and David R. Roskos-Ewoldsen (1991) ‘Representativeness and Conjoint Probability’ 61 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 181. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.181
- G. Gigerenzer and D. G. Goldstein (1996) ‘Reasoning the Fast and Frugal Way: Models of Bounded Rationality’ 103 Psychological Review 650. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.103.4.650
- Paolo Giudici and Silvia Figini (2009) Applied Data Mining for Business and Industry, 2nd edn, Wiley.
- Susan Glazebrook (2010) ‘Risky Business: Predicting Recidivism’ 17 Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 88. doi: 10.1080/13218710903040421
- Edith Greene and Mary Dodge (1995) ‘The Influence of Prior Record Evidence on Juror Decision Making’ 19 Law and Human Behavior 67. doi: 10.1007/BF01499073
- David Hamer (2007) ‘Similar fact reasoning in Phillips: Artificial, disjointed and pernicious’ 30 UNSW Law Journal 609.
- Jiawei Han and Micheline Kamber (2006) Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques, Morgan Kaufmann.
- Martin Hilbert (2012) ‘Toward a Synthesis of Cognitive Biases: How Noisy Information Processing can Bias Human Decision Making’ 138 Psychological Bulletin 211. doi: 10.1037/a0025940
- Edward J. Imwinkelried (2005) An Evidentiary Paradox: Defending the Character Evidence Prohibition by Upholding a Non-character Theory of Logical Relevance, the Doctrine of Chances, University of California, http://ssrn.com/abstract=795725.
- Peter Juslin et al (2011) ‘Reducing Cognitive Biases in Probabilistic Reasoning by the Use of Logarithm Formats’ 120 Cognition 248. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.05.004
- Daniel Kahnemann and S. Frederick (2002) ‘Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgment’ in T. Gilovich, D. Griffin and D. Kahnemann (eds) Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, Cambridge University Press, 49. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511808098.004
- Daniel Kahnemann and Amos Tversky (1973) ‘On the Psychology of Prediction’ 80 Psychological Review 237. doi: 10.1037/h0034747
- Jonathon D. Kurland (2013) ‘Character as a Process in Judgment and Decision Making and its Implications for the Character Evidence Prohibition in Anglo-American Law’ 38 Law and Psychology Review 135.
- Larry Laudan and Ronald Allen, J. (2011) ‘The Devastating Impact of Prior Crimes Evidence and Other Myths of the Criminal Justice Process’ 101 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 492.
- Robert O. Lempert (1977) ‘Modeling Relevance’ 75 Michigan Law Review 1021. doi: 10.2307/1288024
- Sally Lloyd-Bostock (2000) ‘The Effects on Juries of Hearing about the Defendant’s Previous Criminal Record: A Simulation Study’ 62 Criminal Law Review 734.
- Sally Lloyd-Bostock (2006) ‘The Effects on Lay Magistrates of Hearing that the Defendant is of ‘Good Character’, being Left to Speculate, or Hearing that he has a Previous Conviction’ 2006 Criminal Law Review 189.
- Andrew J. Morris (1998) ‘Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b): The Fictitious Ban on Character Reasoning from Other Crime Evidence’ 17 The Review of Litigation 181.
- Nancy Pennington and Reid Hastie (1988) ‘Explanation-based Decision Making: Effects of Memory Structure on Judgment’ 14 Journal Of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 521.
- Nancy Pennington and Reid Hastie (1992) ‘Explaining the Evidence: Tests of the Story Model for Juror Decision Making’ 62 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 189. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.189
- Gordon Pennycook and Valerie A Thompson (2012) ‘Reasoning with Base Rates is Routine, Relatively Effortless, and Context Dependent’ 19 Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 528. doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0249-3
- Anya Plutinski (2011) ‘Four Problems of Abduction: A Brief History’ 1 HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 1.
- Mike Redmayne (2008) ‘The Ethics of Character Evidence’ 61(1) Current Legal Problems 371. doi: 10.1093/clp/61.1.371
- Mike Redmayne (2015) Character Evidence in the Criminal Trial, Oxford University Press.
- Clare Ringland (2011) Sentencing Snapshot: Sexual Assault, 2009–2010, NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research.
- Michael J. Saks and William C. Thompson (2003) ‘Assessing Evidence: Proving Facts’ in David Carson and Ray Bull (eds) Handbook of Psychology in Legal Contexts, 2nd edn, Wiley.
- Sentencing Advisory Council of Victoria (2007) ‘Report on Homicide in Victoria: Offenders, Victims and Sentencing’.
- Dan Simon (1998) ‘A Psychological Model of Judicial Decision Making’ 30 Rutger’s Law Journal 1.
- Dan Simon (2002) ‘Freedom and Constraint in Adjudication: A Look through the Lens of Cognitive Psychology’ 67 Brooklyn Law Review 1097.
- Dan Simon (2004) ‘A Third View of the Black Box: Cognitive Coherence in Legal Decision Making’ 71(2) University of Chicago Law Review 511.
- Dan Simon et al (2001) ‘The Emergence of Coherence Over the Course of Decision Making’ 27 Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1250.
- Dan Simon et al (2004) ‘The Redux of Cognitive Consistency Theories: Evidence Judgments by Constraint Satisfaction’ 86(6) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 814. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.814
- Dan Simon et al (2015) ‘The Coherence Effect: Blending Cold and Hot Cognitions’ 109(3) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 369. doi: 10.1037/pspa0000029
- Kathryn Stanchi and Deirdre Bowen (2014) ‘This is Your Sword: How Damaging are Prior Convictions to Plaintiffs in Civil Trials?’ 89 Washington Law Review 901.
- Isabel Taussig (2012) Sentencing Snapshot: Homicide and Related Offences, NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research.
- Robert Tiller (2011) ‘Trial by Mathematics – Reconsidered’ 10 Law, Probability and Risk 167. doi: 10.1093/lpr/mgr011
- Laurence H. Tribe (1971a) ‘Trial by Mathematics: Precision and Ritual in the Legal Process’ 84 Harvard Law Review 1329. doi: 10.2307/1339610
- Laurence H. Tribe (1971b) ‘A Further Critique of Mathematical Proof’ Harvard Law Review 1810. doi: 10.2307/1339570
- Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahnemann (1983) ‘Extensional Versus Intuitive Reasoning: The Conjunction Fallacy in Probability Judgment’ 90 Psychological Review 293. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.90.4.293
- UK LAW Commission (2001) Report on Evidence of Bad Character in Criminal Proceedings.
- Don Weatherburn and Isabel Taussig (2012) Sentencing Snapshot: Robbery, NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research.
- Matthew B. Welsh and Daniel J. Navarro (2012) ‘Seeing is Believing: Priors, Trust, and Base Rate Neglect’ 119 Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.04.001
- Roselle L. Wissler and Michael J. Saks (1985) ‘On the Inefficacy of Limiting Instructions: When Jurors Use Prior Conviction Evidence to Decide on Guilt’ 9 Law and Human Behavior 37. doi: 10.1007/BF01044288
- C. R. Wolfe and V. F. Reyna (2010) ‘Semantic Coherence and Fallacies in Estimating Joint Probabilities’ 23 Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 203. doi: 10.1002/bdm.650