Unequal Risks of Mistaken Conviction Are Unavoidable: Why Profile Evidence Is Not Uniquely Unfair

Di Bello and O’Neil argue that innocent defendants in criminal trials have a right to not be exposed to a greater risk of false conviction than other innocent defendants facing similar charges. They argue that this right is violated when profile evidence is admitted to trial but not when other forms of evidence, such as eyewitness testimony or trace evidence, are admitted. In this article I show that all kinds of evidence can lead to unequal risks of false conviction and that Di Bello and O’Neil’s argument to the contrary is unsound.