按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
tmarks are corroborative； so are the stolen goods which have been seen in his possession； and something he had lost at the place of the crime which is recognized as his property； etc。 ln short； when all these indices are in themselves established only as highly probable； they give under certain circumstances； when taken together； complete certainty； because the coincidence of so many high probabilities must be declared impossible if X were not the criminal。
In all other cases； as we have already pointed out； _*assumption_ and probability have only a heuristic value for us lawyers。 With the assumption； we must of course count； many cases can not be begun without the assistance of assumption。 Every only half… confused case； the process of which is unknown； requires first of all and as early as possible the application of some assumption to its material。 As soon as the account is inconsistent the assumption must be abandoned and a fresh one and yet again a fresh one assumed； until finally one holds its own and may be established as probable。 It then remains the center of operation； until it becomes of itself a proof or； as we have explained； until so many high probabilities in various directions have been gathered； that； taken in their order； they serve evidentially。 A very high degree of probability is sufficient in making complaints； but sentencing requires ‘‘certainty；'' and in most cases the struggle between the prosecution and the defense； and the doubt of the judge； turns upon the question of probability as against proof。＇1＇
＇1＇ Of course we mean by ‘‘proof'' as by ‘‘certainty'' only the highest possible degree of probability。
That probability is in this way and in a number of relations； of great value to the criminalist can not appear doubtful。 Mittermaier defines its significance briefly： ‘‘Probability naturally can never lead to sentence。 It is； however； important as a guide for the conduct of the examiner； as authorizing him to take certain measures； it shows how to attach certain legal processes in various directions。''
Suppose that we review the history of the development of the theory of probability。 The first to have attempted a sharp distinction between demonstrable and probable knowledge was Locke。 Leibnitz was the first to recognize the importance of the theory of probability for inductive logic。 He was succeeded by the mathematician Bernoulli and the revolutionist Condorcet。 The theory in its modern form was studied by Laplace； Quetelet； Herschel； von Kirchmann； J。 von Kries； Venn； Cournot； Fick； von Bortkiewicz； etc。 The concept that is called probability varies with different authorities。 Locke＇1＇ divides all fundamentals into demonstrative and probable。 According to this classification it is probable that ‘‘all men are mortal；'' and that ‘‘the sun will rise to…morrow。'' But to be consistent with ordinary speech the fundamentals must be classified as evidence； certainties； and probabilities。 By certainties I understand such fundamentals as are supported by experience and leave no room for doubt or considerationeverything else； especially as it permits of further proof； is more or less probable。
＇1＇ Locke： Essay on the Human Understanding。
Laplace＇2＇ spoke more definitely‘‘Probability depends in part on our ignorance； in part on our knowledge 。 。 。
＇2＇ Laplace： Essay Philosophique sur les Probabilit