The article focuses on the quantitative interpretation of trials, including its communicative inputs. Outlines some of the shortcomings of the process of identifying guilt and verdict. In the analysis of the legal solutions introduced subjective probabilities and some of the information and communication components. While the Bayesian inference is a common method for revision of beliefs, it requires precise prior probabilities and likelihoods, usually assessed in the form of intervals. Therefore this work comments upon procedures to introduce interval probabilities to statistical reasoning that support the analysis of evidence in court trials.

This work highlights the problems of judgment in legal trials and some of the communicative elements that are present here. It emphasizes the possibilities to improve the decision analysis process in trials by adopting subjective probability as a measure of uncertainty about the level of guilt of a defendant judged upon testimonies. Bayesian and other approaches can then serve to adapt beliefs. The key element of the discussion here is the introduction of interval probability estimates and the benefits they bring to legal decision making.