Foundations of Evidence Law
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 5779861 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Alex Stein (corresponding author) |
| Year | 2005 |
| Pages | 264 |
| Publication date | 2005-08-25 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | BOOK |
| Venue | Foundations of Evidence Law (SOURCE_BOOK) |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198257363.001.0001 |
| OpenAlex | W4205375815 |
| Open Library | OL9408460M |
| ISBN | 9780198257363 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 40 |
| References cited | 1 |
This book examines systematically the underlying theory of evidence in Anglo-American legal systems and identifies the defining characteristics of adjudicative fact-finding. The book develops an innovative theory which sets aside the traditional vision of evidence law as facilitating the discovery of the truth. Combining probability theory, epistemology, economic analysis, and moral philosophy it argues instead that the fundamental purpose of evidence law is to apportion the risk of error in conditions of uncertainty. The book begins by identifying the domain of evidence law. It then describes the basic traits of adjudicative fact-finding and explores the epistemological foundations of the concept. This discussion identifies the problem of probabilistic deduction that accompanies generalizations to which fact-finders resort. The book advances the principle of maximal individualization that does not allow fact-finders to make a finding against a person when the evidence they use is not susceptible to individualized testing. This analysis identifies allocation of the risk of error as requiring regulation by evidence law. Advocating a principled allocation of the risk of error, the book denounces free proof for allowing individual judges to apportion this risk as they deem fit. The book then develops three fundamental principles for allocating the risk of error: the cost-efficiency principle which applies across the board; the equality principle which applies in civil litigation; and the equal best principle which applies in criminal trials. Regulating both the admissibility of evidence and its sufficiency, these principles explain and justify many existing evidentiary rules
Aside · Jury Decision Making Processes · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Legal and Constitutional Studies · British Isles · Courts & procedure · Criminal law · Criminal Law - General · England · English legal system: law of evidence · Evidence · Evidence (law) · Great britain · Law · Law Profession · Legal Reference · united states · USA
Justice In-Between
Sources, données et validation empirique
Expert Signs and Legal Burdens
Deciding, ‘What Happened?’ When We Don’t Really Know
Reasonable Doubt from Unconceived Alternatives
Uncovering Alethia
The Policy of Evidence
Plausible Crime Stories
Exclusión de la prueba pericial científica (de baja calidad epistémica) en fase de admisibilidad en procesos penales de tradición románica-continental
Uma concepção minimalista e garantista da presunção de inocência
The defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in the Italian criminal justice system
Truth, Evidence, Truth
The ‘perfect storm’ of Reach
Rebooting the new evidence scholarship
Measuring justice
Civil liability and the 50%+ standard of proof
Laudan’s error
The civil standard of proof—what is it, actually
Can there be a burden of the best explanation
The criminal justice system as a problem in binary classification
Killing Kaplanism
Evidence, Risk, and Proof Paradoxes
The ‘mirror of evidence’ and the plausibility of judicial proof
The probabilism debate that never was
Naked statistical evidence and incentives for lawful conduct
Incertidumbre probatoria por exceso
Juicio por jurados. La unanimidad en el veredicto de culpabilidad como garantía
El sistema de derecho probatorio bajo medieval de las Siete Partidas y las Federal Rules of Evidence de 1975
The trouble with standards of proof
The reasonable doubt standard as inference to the best explanation
When statistical evidence is not specific enough
Sensitivity, safety, and admissibility
From “Trust Me” to “Show Me” Journalism
Making Sources Visible
Justifying the news
Skirmishing toward a general theory of evidence and proof
Reframing judicial proof
Foundations of Evidence Law
Criminal Proof
Debating the legitimacy of a contested environmental illness
| Unique citing works | 40 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,9 |
| Citation span | 2005 - 2025 (21) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 40 |