Investigating sentence severity with judicial open data -- A case study on sentencing high-tech crime in the Dutch criminal justice system

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2104.04486v1
• Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2021 17:12:21 GMT
• Title: Investigating sentence severity with judicial open data -- A case study on sentencing high-tech crime in the Dutch criminal justice system
• Abstract summary: Due to privacy legislation, judicial open data -- like court judgments -- in Europe is usually anonymised. Because this removes part of the information on for instance offenders, the question arises to what extent criminological research into sentencing can make use of anonymised open data. Over the period 2015-2020, we analysed sentencing in 25,366 court judgments and, in particular, investigated the relationship between sentence severity and the offender's use of advanced ICT. The most important results are, firstly, that offenders who use advanced ICT are sentenced to longer custodial sentences compared to other offenders.
• Score: 3.35887644871588
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Open data promotes transparency and accountability as everyone can analyse it. Law enforcement and the judiciary are increasingly making data available, to increase trust and confidence in the criminal justice system. Due to privacy legislation, judicial open data -- like court judgments -- in Europe is usually anonymised. Because this removes part of the information on for instance offenders, the question arises to what extent criminological research into sentencing can make use of anonymised open data. We answer this question based on a case study in which we use the open data of the Dutch criminal justice system that rechtspraak.nl/Uitspraken makes available. Over the period 2015-2020, we analysed sentencing in 25,366 court judgments and, in particular, investigated the relationship between sentence severity and the offender's use of advanced ICT -- as this is information that is readily available in open data. The most important results are, firstly, that offenders who use advanced ICT are sentenced to longer custodial sentences compared to other offenders. Second, our results show that the quality of sentencing research with open data is comparable to the quality of sentencing research with judicial databases, which are not anonymised.

Related papers

• A Comprehensive Framework for Efficient Court Case Management and Prioritization [0.0]
  The Indian judicial system faces a critical challenge with approximately 52 million pending cases.<n>This study proposes a cloud-based software framework to classify and prioritize court cases.<n>Cases are initially entered by advocates on record or court registrars, followed by automated hearing date allocation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-16T17:11:38Z)
• AppealCase: A Dataset and Benchmark for Civil Case Appeal Scenarios [47.83822985839837]
  We present the AppealCase dataset, consisting of 10,000 pairs of real-world, matched first-instance and second-instance documents across 91 categories of civil cases.<n>The dataset also includes detailed annotations along five dimensions central to appellate review: judgment reversals, reversal reasons, cited legal provisions, claim-level decisions, and whether there is new information in the second instance.<n> Experimental results reveal that all current models achieve less than 50% F1 scores on the judgment reversal prediction task, highlighting the complexity and challenge of the appeal scenario.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T10:50:33Z)
• AnnoCaseLaw: A Richly-Annotated Dataset For Benchmarking Explainable Legal Judgment Prediction [56.797874973414636]
  AnnoCaseLaw is a first-of-its-kind dataset of 471 meticulously annotated U.S. Appeals Court negligence cases. Our dataset lays the groundwork for more human-aligned, explainable Legal Judgment Prediction models. Results demonstrate that LJP remains a formidable task, with application of legal precedent proving particularly difficult.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-28T19:14:48Z)
• SoK: The Gap Between Data Rights Ideals and Reality [46.14715472341707]
  Do rights-based privacy laws effectively empower individuals over their data? This paper scrutinizes these approaches by reviewing empirical studies, news articles, and blog posts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-03T21:52:51Z)
• WCLD: Curated Large Dataset of Criminal Cases from Wisconsin Circuit Courts [7.415975372963897]
  We contribute WCLD, a curated large dataset of 1.5 million criminal cases from circuit courts in the U.S. state of Wisconsin. We used reliable public data from 1970 to 2020 to curate attributes like prior criminal counts and recidivism outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T15:04:29Z)
• Pile of Law: Learning Responsible Data Filtering from the Law and a 256GB Open-Source Legal Dataset [46.156169284961045]
  We offer an approach to filtering grounded in law, which has directly addressed the tradeoffs in filtering material. First, we gather and make available the Pile of Law, a 256GB dataset of open-source English-language legal and administrative data. Second, we distill the legal norms that governments have developed to constrain the inclusion of toxic or private content into actionable lessons. Third, we show how the Pile of Law offers researchers the opportunity to learn such filtering rules directly from the data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-01T06:25:15Z)
• Algorithmic Fairness Datasets: the Story so Far [68.45921483094705]
  Data-driven algorithms are studied in diverse domains to support critical decisions, directly impacting people's well-being. A growing community of researchers has been investigating the equity of existing algorithms and proposing novel ones, advancing the understanding of risks and opportunities of automated decision-making for historically disadvantaged populations. Progress in fair Machine Learning hinges on data, which can be appropriately used only if adequately documented. Unfortunately, the algorithmic fairness community suffers from a collective data documentation debt caused by a lack of information on specific resources (opacity) and scatteredness of available information (sparsity)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-03T17:25:46Z)
• Analyzing a Carceral Algorithm used by the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections [0.0]
  This paper is focused on the Pennsylvania Additive Classification Tool (PACT) used to classify prisoners' custody levels while they are incarcerated. The algorithm in this case determines the likelihood a person would endure additional disciplinary actions, can complete required programming, and gain experiences that, among other things, are distilled into variables feeding into the parole algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-06T18:47:31Z)
• Deep Interpretable Criminal Charge Prediction and Algorithmic Bias [2.3347476425292717]
  This paper addresses bias issues with post-hoc explanations to provide a trustable prediction of whether a person will receive future criminal charges. Our approach shows consistent and reliable prediction precision and recall on a real-life dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-25T07:00:13Z)
• Going dark? Analysing the impact of end-to-end encryption on the outcome of Dutch criminal court cases [3.968067568436395]
  Law enforcement agencies struggle with criminals using end-to-end encryption (E2EE) E2EE hampers attribution and prosecution of criminals who rely on encrypted communication. Dutch courts appear to be as successful in convicting offenders who rely on E2EE as those who do not.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-13T18:38:22Z)
• Equality before the Law: Legal Judgment Consistency Analysis for Fairness [55.91612739713396]
  In this paper, we propose an evaluation metric for judgment inconsistency, Legal Inconsistency Coefficient (LInCo) We simulate judges from different groups with legal judgment prediction (LJP) models and measure the judicial inconsistency with the disagreement of the judgment results given by LJP models trained on different groups. We employ LInCo to explore the inconsistency in real cases and come to the following observations: (1) Both regional and gender inconsistency exist in the legal system, but gender inconsistency is much less than regional inconsistency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-25T14:28:00Z)
• Trustworthy Transparency by Design [57.67333075002697]
  We propose a transparency framework for software design, incorporating research on user trust and experience. Our framework enables developing software that incorporates transparency in its design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-19T12:34:01Z)
• The effect of differential victim crime reporting on predictive policing systems [84.86615754515252]
  We show how differential victim crime reporting rates can lead to outcome disparities in common crime hot spot prediction models. Our results suggest that differential crime reporting rates can lead to a displacement of predicted hotspots from high crime but low reporting areas to high or medium crime and high reporting areas.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-30T01:57:22Z)
• Pursuing Open-Source Development of Predictive Algorithms: The Case of Criminal Sentencing Algorithms [0.0]
  We argue that open-source algorithm development should be the standard in highly consequential contexts. We suggest these issues are exacerbated by the proprietary and expensive nature of virtually all widely used criminal sentencing algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-12T14:53:43Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.