Forecasting the future while investigating the past. The use of computational models in pre-trial detention decisions.




pre-trial detention, presumption of innocence, prediction, behavior, legal presumption, risk assessment.


The paper focuses on the traditional purpose of pre-trial detention (and other precautionary measures) to prevent specific risks. While liberty is the rule, before conviction, pre-trial detention is an absolute exception, competing with the opposite principle of the presumption of innocence: providing valuable and accurate justification for balancing the interest to prevent risk with the presumption of innocence is an overarching difficulty for judges, in the whole western world. Which the solutions? The paper reflects and compares the traditional solution of legal presumptions with the newer trend of actuarial assessment tools, based on psycho-criminological theories, based on the Italian and the uS federal systems.


Os dados de download ainda não estão disponíveis.


ALSCHULER, Albert, W., Preventive Pre-Trial Detention and the Failure of Interest-balancing Approached to Due Process, Michigan Law Rev., 1986, vol. 85, Issue 3, p. 520 ff.,

ANDRIOLI, Vittorio, Presunzioni (dir. proc. civ.), Novissimo Digesto Italiano, vol. XIII, Utet, Torino, 1966, p. 765 ff.

AUSTIN, Amaryllis., The Presumption for Detention Statute’s Relationship to Release Rates, in Federal Probation, 2017, vol. 81, no. 1, p. 52 ff.

BARTOLI Roberto, Colpevolezza tra personalismo e prevenzione, Giappichelli Torino, 2005

CAVADINO Paul, GIBSON Bryan, Bail, The Law, Best Practice and the Debate, Waterside Press, Hook, 1993

CENTORAME, Federica, Presunzioni di pericolosità e coercizione cautelare, Giappichelli, Torino, 2016.

COHEN, Thomas H., LOWENKAMP, Christopher T., HICKS, William E., Revalidation the Federal Pretrial Risk Assessment Instrument (PTRA): A Research Summary, Federal Probation, 2018, vol. 82, n. 2, p. 23 ff.

DANIELE, Marcello, Il diritto alla libertà personale e le manipolazioni dell’habeas corpus, in Negri D., Zilletti L. (eds.), Nei limiti della Costituzione. Il codice repubblicano e il processo penale contemporaneo, Cedam, Padova, 2019

DANIELE, Marcello, Habeas Corpus. Manipolazioni di una garanzia, Giappichelli, Torino, 2017, 108 ff.

DELVECCHIO, Francesca., Presunzioni legali e rieducazione del condannato, Giappichelli, Torino 2020

DUBBER, Markus D., HÖRNLE Tatiana, Criminal Law. A Comparative Approach, OUP, Oxford, 2016

DUFF, Anthony, Pre-Trial Detention and the Presumption of Innocence, in Ashworth A., Zedner L., Tomlin P. (Eds.), Prevention and the Limits of the Criminal Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2013, pp. 115-132.

FANUELE Chiara, La libertà su cauzione: un’alternativa alla custodia cautelare, Cedam, Padova, 2016

FAZEL, Seena, The Scientific Validity of Current Approaches to Violence and Criminal Risk Assessment, J. W. De Keijser, J.V. Roberts, J. Ryberg, Predictive Sentencing, Normative and empirical perspective, Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2019

FRIEDMAN, Lawrence M., Crime and Punishment in American History, Basic Books, New York, 1994

GIGERENZER, Gerd, Rationality for Morals, OUP, Oxford, 2008

GIULIANI, Livia, La libertà personale dell’imputato dopo la l. 16 aprile 2015, n. 47, in Rivista di Diritto Processuale, 2017, p. 165 ff.

GREVI, Vittorio, Libertà provvisoria ed esigenze di tutela ella collettività: una questione di legittimità costituzionale,, II, 1976, 633 ff.

ISRAEL, Giorgio, IANNELLI, Mimmo, Modellistica matematica, Enciclopedia Italiana Treccani, VI Appendice, Treccani, Roma, 2000

JACOBS, Günther, Das Schuldprinzip, in Rheinische-Westfälische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vorträge G 319, 1993, 7 ff.

JUNG Sina, PETRICK, Carolin, SCHILLER Eva M., MUNSTER, Lukas, Developments in German Criminal Law: The Urgent Issues regarding Prolonged Pre-Trial Detention in Germany, German Criminal Law, 2021, p. 307 ff.

KAUFMANN, Arthur, Das Schuldprinzip, Winter, Heidelberg, 1961.

KEHL, Danielle, GUO, Priscilla, KESSLER, Samuel, Algorithms in the Criminal Justice System: Assessing the Use of risk Assessments in Sentencing, Responsive Communities Initiative, Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, Harvard Law School, 2017, available at

KIESELBACH, Daniel, Pre-Trial Criminal Procedure: Preventive Detention and the Presumption of Innocence, in Criminal Law Quarterly, 1989, vol. 31, n. 2., p. 171 ff.

KLEINBERG, Jon, et alii Human Decisions and Machine Predictions, QJ Econ, 2018, 237 ff.

KVARACEUS, William C., Anxious Youth: Dynamics of Delinquency, Columbus, Charles E. Merrill Publ., 1966

LACEY, Nicola. State Punishment, Rutlege, London-New York, 1988

LOGAN KOEPKE, John, Robinson David G., Danger Ahead: Risk Assessment and

the Future of Bail Reform, Washington Law Review, 2018, 1731 ff.

MANES, Vittorio, Lo ‘sciame di precedenti’ della Corte costituzionale sulle

presunzioni in materia cautelare, Diritto Penale e Processo, 2014, p. 457 ff. MAZZA, Oliviero, La presunzione di innocenza messa alla prova, in La giustizia

penale, 2019, 181-192.

MEYER, Hermine H., Constitutionality of Pretrial Detention, The Georgetown

Law Journal, 1972, vol. 60, n. 6, p. 1469 ff.

MEYERS, Nicoles M., Eroding the Presumption of Innocence: Pre-Trial Detention and the Use of Conditional Release on Bail, in British Journal of Criminology, 2017, pp. 664-683

MINDE, Brandon, D., FARRELL Elizabeth A., The Role of Public Safety Assessment in Pretrial Detention, New Jersey Lawyer, 2019, n. 318, p. 29 ff.

MORENO CATENA, Victor, Spain, in S. Ruggeri (ed), Liberty and Security in Europe, Universitätsverlag Osnabrück, Göttingen, 2013, 141 ff.

NEGRI Daniele, L’imputato presente al processo, Giappichelli, Torino, 2014,

NORRIE, Alan, Crime, Reason and History. A Critical Introduction to Criminal Law, CUP, Cambridge, 2014

ORLANDI, Renzo (2013), Introduction, in Ruggeri Stefano (ed), Liberty and Security in Europe, Universitätsverlag Osnabrück, Göttingen, 9 ff..

PAGALLO, Ugo, Algo-Rithms and the Beat of the Legal Drum, in Philosophy and Technology, 2018, 1 ff.

PELISSERO, Marco, Pericolosità sociale e doppio binario. Vecchi e nuovi modelli di incapacitazione, Giappichelli, Torino, 2008.

PIFFERI, Marco, Individualisation of Punishment and the Rule of Law: Reshaping Legality in the United States and in Europe between the 19th and 20th Century, American Journal of Legal History, 2012, 325 ff.

QUATTROCOLO S., Artificial Intelligence, Computational Models and Criminal Proceedings. A Framework for a European Legal Discussion, Springer, Cham, 2020

REDMAYNE, Michael, Character in Criminal Trial, OUP, Oxford. 2015.

RYBERG, Jesper, Risk and Retribution. On the Possibility of Reconciling Considerations of dangerousness and Desert, in J. W. De Keijser, J.V. Roberts, J. Ryberg, Predictive Sentencing, Normative and empirical perspective, Hart Publishing, Oxford. 2019.

RUGGERI, Stefano, Comparative analysis of pre-trial precautionary measures in criminal proceedings, in S. Ruggeri (ed), Liberty and Security in Europe, Universitätsverlag Osnabrück, Göttingen, 2013, 185 ff.

SCHNACKE, Timoty R., JONES, Michael R., BROOKER, Claire, M.B, The History of Bail and Pretrial Release, Pretrial Justice Institute, 2010

STEVENS, Lonneke, The meaning of the presumption of innocence for pre-trial detention: An empirical approach, Netherland Journal of Legal Philosophy, 42(3), 2013, 239-248

STEVENS, Lonneke., Pre-Trial Detention: The Presumption of Innocence and Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights Cannot and Does Not Limit Its Increasing Use, in European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, Vol. 17, Issue 2, 2009, pp. 165-180;

STEVENSON, Megan.T., Assessing Risk Assessment in Action, Minnesota Law Review, 2018, 303 ff.

TONDI, Veronica, Il bail. La libertà su cauzione negli ordinamenti anglosassoni, Cedam, Padova, 2016.

TONRY, Michael, Sentencing and Prediction. Old Wine in Old Bottles, in J. W. De Keijser, J.V. Roberts, J. Ryberg, Predictive Sentencing. Normative and empirical perspective, Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2019, 269 ff.

TRIBE, Laurence H., Trial by mathematics: Precision and Ritual in the Legal process, Harvard Law Rev., 1971, vol. 84, p. 1368 ff.

TRIBE, Laurence H., An Ounce Of Detention: Preventive Justice in the World of John Mithcell, Virginia Law Review, 1970, vol. 56, p. 407 ff.

UNDERWOOD, Barbara D., Law and the Crystal Ball: Predicting Behavior with Statistical Interference and Individualized Judgement, Yale Law Journal, 1979, vol. 88, 1409 ff.

VAN NOSTRAND, Marie, Legal and Evidence Based Practices: Application of Legal Principles, Laws, and Research to the Field of Pretrial Services, 2007, Crime and Justice institute – National Institute of Corrections, US Dept. Of Justice, Bibliogov, Washington, 2012.

VOGLER, Richard, England and Wales, in S. Ruggeri (ed), Liberty and Security in Europe, Universitätsverlag Osnabrück, Göttingen, 2013, 87 ff.

WARNER, Charles D., Some aspects of the indeterminate sentence, Yale L. J., 1899, p. 219 ff.

WILLIAMS, Jack F., Classifying Pre-Trial Detention Decisions under the Bail Reform Act of 1984; A Statistical Approach, American Criminal Law Review, 1993, Vol. 30, p. 285 ff.

ZACCHÉ, Francesco, La libertà personale tra diritti della persona e nuove sfide del processo penale, in Rivista Italiana di Diritto e Procedura Penale, 2020, 2006 ff.;

ZARA, Georgia, FARRINGTON, David P., Criminal Recidivism: explanation, prediction and prevention. Rutledge, Oxon, 2016.






DOSSIÊ: Liberdade pessoal do imputado e medidas cautelares restritivas à liberdade individual no processo penal

Como Citar

Quattrocolo, S. (2021). Forecasting the future while investigating the past. The use of computational models in pre-trial detention decisions. Revista Brasileira De Direito Processual Penal, 7(3), 1859.