1. For example, see L. H. Tribe, `Trial by Mathematics: Precision and Ritual in the Legal Process' (1971) 84Harvard Law Review1329, and, more recently, R. W. Wright, `Causation, Responsibility, Risk, Probability, Naked Statistics, and Proof: Pruning the Bramble Bush by Clarifying the Concepts' (1998) 73Iowa Law Review1001, J. L. Gastwirth,Statistical Science in the Courtroom(Springer-Verlag: New York, 2000) and P. Tillers, `Introduction: Three Contributions to Three Important Problems in Evidence Scholarship' (1997) 18Cardozo Law Review1875.
2. See M. Colyvan, H. M. Regan and S. Ferson, `Is It a Crime to Belong to a Reference Class?' (2001) 9Journal of Political Philosophy168 (reprinted in H. E. Kyburg and M. Thalos (eds),Probability Is the Very Guide of Life(Open Court: Chicago, 2003)), P. Tillers, `If Wishes Were Horses: Discursive Comments on Attempts to Prevent Individuals from Being Unfairly Burdened by their Reference Classes' (2005) 4Law, Probability, and Risk33 and R. J. Allen and M. S. Pardo, `The Problematic Value of Mathematical Models of Evidence' (2007) 36Journal of Legal Studies107.
3. A. Hajek, `The Reference Class Problem is Your Problem Too' (2007) 156Synthese563.
4. United StatesvShonubi, 962 F Supp 370 (EDNY 1997);United StatesvShonubi, 103 F 3d 1085 (2d Cir. 1997);United StatesvShonubi, 895 F Supp 460 (EDNY 1995);United StatesvShonubi, 998 F 2d 84 (2d Cir. 1993);United StatesvShonubi, 802 F Supp 859 (EDNY 1992).
5. Even here the quantity in question was estimated by some rather crude statistical techniques.