Many countries have a binary justice system that sorts defendants into two very broad categories: ‘guilty’ and ‘not guilty’. Those deemed ‘not guilty’ are often left with the stigma of a criminal record, even when the accused was overwhelmingly proven to have done nothing wrong. Meanwhile, another defendant might also be labelled ‘not guilty’, despite substantial evidence of guilt, if a single juror had some lingering doubts. And in some countries, such as the United States, the system incentivises agreements that pressure defendants to plead guilty to crimes regardless of their actual guilt. In this video from Wireless Philosophy, Barry Lam, an associate professor of philosophy at Vassar College, discusses alternatives to the prevailing two-verdict system that might more accurately reflect degrees of uncertainty – as well as some of their potential pitfalls.
Video by Wireless Philosophy
The ancient world
What did the Rosetta Stone’s inscription actually communicate?
Thinkers and theories
Bernard Williams on Descartes’s audacious endeavour to prove knowledge is possible
The cast of ‘misfit toys’ who keep life on an idyllic tourist island afloat
Ageing and death
When his elderly parents make a suicide pact, Doron struggles to accept their choice
Biography and memoir
What Akiko saw at the centre of the Hiroshima blast, and the indelible mark it left
To understand the limits of human senses, look to the wild world of animal cognition
Design and fashion
From sheep to sea – an ode to the iconic sweater that warms Cornish sailors
The revolutionary artist who propelled the Black Panther movement with imagery
Yes, the Inuit have dozens of words for snow – but what does each one mean exactly?