Abstract
It is foreseeable that intelligent machines can replace judges in the Crown Court; whereas it is undesirable to attempt to replace juries in the Criminal Jus-tice System with non-humans.
This thesis explores whether intelligent machines can fulfil the role of the judge and jury in a criminal case heard at the Crown Court and how ‘bias’ affects the answer. There is difference between machine knowledge and human knowledge, but judges are expected to be robotically neutral and unbiased no matter what they are made of. If an intelligent machine can serve the role of a judge and be less biased than a human one, it can replace human judges. On the other hand, machines cannot be human’s ‘peers’, considering the legal definition of the word, to sit as jurors. Neither can they be biased or unbiased in a way that reflects the random and infinite dimensions of humanity. Machines, however intelligent, cannot replace human juries.
Keywords：artificial intelligence, Criminal Justice System, bias
摘要
我們可以預見智能機器能夠取代皇家法院的法官；然而，試圖用非人類取代英國刑事系統中的陪審團是不可取的。
本文探討智能機器是否能夠在皇家法院審理的刑事案件中履行法官和陪審團的角色，以及「偏見」如何影響這個問題的答案。機器知識與人類知識之間有不同，但不論是人或機器，法官就是要機械式地中立且不帶偏見。如果一台智能機器能夠履行法官的角色並且比人類法官要來的不帶偏見，它能夠取代人類法官。另一方面，機器不能作為人類法律定義上的「同儕」來擔任陪審員，再者，不論是否帶有偏見，他們也無法反映人性隨機和無限的多重性。機器無論多麼有智能，都無法取代人類陪審團。
關鍵字：人工智能、英國刑事系統、偏見