Sato on 3D Visualization System for Lay Judges to Understand Legal Disputes on Trial

Professor Dr. Tatsuya Sato of Ritsumeikan University presented a paper entitled 3D Visualization System for Lay Judges to Understand Legal Disputes on Trial, at ICLS 2012: International Conference on Law and Society, held 5-8 June 2012 in Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.

The paper was presented as part of a panel entitled Informational Justice and Criminal Justice: Empirical Approach for Assessing Fair Judgment in the Criminal Justice System.

Here is the abstract of the paper:

In Japan, the mixed jury system, the SAIBAN-IN trial system, was brought in on May 21st, 2009. This is a mixed jury system, which comprises three professional and six lay judges. The Saiban-in trial system employs the participation of the general public in the criminal justice system. In lay judge systems in Japan, citizens are selected at random and so cognitive support for these citizens is needed to facilitate the process. Visualization does not only consist of recording or replaying the raw material, but of presenting meta-coded information along with original data. The KTH cube is a promising tool for managing this visualization. The KACHINA (Knowledge Archiving with the Collaboration of Human and Intelligent Network Agents) cube (KC) has been developed as a method for facilitating the visualization of vast amounts of information using a three-dimensional (3D) viewing template. The simple idea underlying the KC is that of visualizing information using a “cube,” that is, a shape with three dimensions. This system represents a region as a virtual 3D space that consists of a 2D map with a time axis. The KC can be adapted to include not only geographic information but also non-geographic information. To handle non-geographic information, a conceptual map, not a 2D geographical map, should be used. A conceptual map is a figure that expresses the development of a story or event. The KC uses this tool to visualize the aggregation sequence of many statements made during interrogation. The 1st Dimension is used to show the discrepancies between the stories of the prosecution and defense in this case. The 2nd Dimension is used to show the timeline of the events of the crime according to the prosecution’s story. Every story told by prosecutors has a unique time line and events relevant to the crime should fit within this timeline. However, it must be noted that this story is a product of the prosecutors’ inference. The 3rd dimension shows the time when each defendant gives his or her statement. All investigation records from defendants have a unique position of alignment inside the cube as a fragment. Thus each person either “confessed” or did not confess at a unique time. In this presentation, I will illustrate our approach with a case in which multiple defendants had multiple statements. The KTH cube can never tell us which confession is true. It is a tool which provides cognitive assistance, functioning as an instructional scaffold (Bruner, 1978; Applebee and Langer, 1983) for everyone in court.

This entry was posted in Applications, Articles and papers, Conference papers, Research findings and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s