Difference between revisions of "Criminal sentencing software"
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
==Ethical implications== | ==Ethical implications== | ||
Ethical implications | Ethical implications | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==References== | ||
| + | {{ resource | | ||
| + | <references/> | ||
| + | }} | ||
Revision as of 15:22, 16 March 2018
Criminal sentencing software refers to non-human tools and algorithms used to determine the length and severity of a criminal’s sentence. This software typically takes a number of factors about the criminal, runs them through an algorithm, and serves the results as a recommendation to a judge. The increased reliance on criminal sentencing software over the last 20 years has raised serious ethical concerns. The algorithms of these software products have been shown to exhibit biases against certain ethnic groups, which has become a source of controversy among judges and policymakers.
History
Early forms of criminal sentencing software were developed starting in the mid-1990s. Police officials in Placer County, California worked with Miriam Liskin, a computer scientist, to create California CrimeTime. This software took input from the user regarding a criminal’s offenses and allowed the user to see sentencing information from others who performed similar crimes. Over the years, a number of features were added to enhance functionality, which led to the expansion of CrimeTime outside California and across the USA. While newer, more complex criminal sentencing software now exists, CrimeTime is still very prevalent, and used in approximately 90% of California’s counties.[1]
Ethical implications
Ethical implications
