Statistical evidence and sudden infant death syndrome

Abstract

tatistical evidence is one of the prima facie tools used in the courtroom in common law jurisdictions. This paper is a case study aimed at describing the role of expert statistical evidence and how it influenced the outcome of the Sally Clark case.Sally Clark, a solicitor by profession, who was wrongly convicted and imprisoned by the Chester Crown Court in England in 1999 for the alleged murder of her two children. The prosecution’s expert witness Professor Sir Roy Meadow, a consultant paediatrician, claimed in his statistical evidence that “the probability of two sudden infant death syndrome cases (SIDS) in one family matching the profile of the appellant was 1 in 73 million.”Though upon appeal the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) quashed the appellant’s conviction in 2003, it brought to the fore the application of statistics in the courtroom and its overall impact on the justice system. It is revealed that statistical evidence should not be used to establish the truth of an ultimate issue with scientific certainty. Expert witnesses should not adduce evidence recklessly. The use of any far-reaching statistics as evidence requires the services of experts with competence in medical statistics. The criminal justice system has a huge task of exposing true child abusers. But the socio-economic cost of wrongful conviction of accused parents of SIDS cases is immense. Tragically, Sally Clark never came to terms with her wrongful conviction and in 2007 drank herself to death.