Issues

Full Issue

PDF

Essays

Inductive Reasoning in Tax Law: Inference and Evidentiary Sufficiency

Deliberation, epistemic functions and establishment of facts: Bases of a methodological structure for the Criminal Trial Court

Standard of Proof in Tax Omission Disputes: An Overview of Ecuadorian Legislation and Case Law

Scientific Expert Report in Bloodstains: A Reflection on its Application in the Spanish Court. Biases and Recommendations

Causality and Normativity in Tax Evidence: Reflections Based on Exclusionary Rule.

Conjectures and Refutations

Taking the Evolution of the Standards of Proof for a Criminal Conviction Seriously

Epistemic Injustice in the Criminal Trial: Engaging with Gonzales Rose, Herdy, Jalloh and Owusu-Bempah.

Science for Legal Proceedings

False Beliefs about Witness Memory in Professionals and Students of Social and Legal Sciences.

Full Issue

PDF

Essays

Document production and sanctions in the IBA rules on the taking of evidence in international arbitration: A critical analysis

Judging Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt: A Logic and Epistemological Rule

Assessment of Evidence in Arbitration

What Does It Mean to be "Plausible"?

Implicit Biases, Explicit Injustice: Epistemic Effects on Unconscious Biases in Evidential Reasoning in Mexico

Conjecturas e refutações

Understanding and preventing testimonial injustice in criminal proceedings: A comment on Federico Picinali “Evidential reasoning, testimonial injustice and the fairness of the criminal trial”

Testimonial Injustice in Evidential Reasoning: A Reply to Federico Picinali

A Critical Perspective on Testimonial Injustice: Interrogating Witnesses’ Credibility Excess in Criminal Trials: A Comment on Federico Picinali’s "Evidential Reasoning, Testimonial Injustice and the Fairness of the Criminal Trial"

Understanding Epistemic Injustice as Contributory Injustice: A Comment on Picinali’s Argument

Full Issue

PDF

Essays

Predictive Evidence in Criminal Trials: Why Criminal Law should treat people as if they have unpredictable free will?

An account of events, by definition, involves an understanding of the actors: evidence in international commercial arbitration

Notes for a Logic of Evidence in Law

A raison d’être for the judicial process: an analysis from the Spanish procedural system

Dogmatic and evidential considerations of mens rea in the criminal process

Law and economics of burdens and standards of proof

Conjectures and Refutations

Evidential reasoning, testimonial injustice and the fairness of the criminal trial

Reply to the Comments on Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial: Truth, Proof and Rights

Science for Legal Proceedings

As an introduction to the section on purpose of the expert reports’ content

Deficiencies in a psychological expert opinion: Critical analysis in regard to a family law case

Analysis of the expert report by the forensic pathologist and specialist in Legal Medicine, Ms. C.C.A.

The chemical expert report on the determination of gunshot residue: minimum content, expert reasoning and due process

Iuris prudentia

The agony of the exclusionary rule of the illegally obtained evidence. Variations on a tragic case: Commentary on the judgment of the Supreme Court, Second Chamber, no. 891/2022, of November 11, 2022

Full Issue

PDF

Essays

The crown witness between proof and error

Michele Taruffo: thoughts and evolution of studies on evidence

Witness preparation: a supposed mantra, full of epistemic risks

Fundamentals for the admissibility of metaevidence in criminal proceedings

The importance of the abductive reasoning in the criminal investigation

Conjectures and Refutations

Could Robot Judges Believe? Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial as we approach the Digital Age: A Comment on Sarah Summers «Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial: Truth, Proof, and Rights»

What’s so Special about the Criminal Trial? A Comment on Sarah Summers «Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial: Truth, Proof, and Rights»

Truth, Proof, Rights and the Rule of Law in Criminal Adjudication: A Comment on Sarah Summers «Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial: Truth, Proof and Rights»

Accuracy and fairness - siamese twins? A Comment on Sarah Summers «Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial: Truth, Proof and Rights»

Full Issue

PDF

Essays

The Specific Evidence Rule. Reference Classes – Individuals – Personal Autonomy

Requiem for the burden of the proof

Language, logic and some repercussions of the (in)definition of thema probandum

Homicide, infidelity and dirt in hotel rooms: problems of probatory significance

Judicial error and eyewitness identification: lessons drawn from the brazilian experience

About the irreductible scope of subjectivity in the formulation and application of evidence standards

Intime conviction’ in Germany: Conceptual Foundations, Historical Development and Current Meaning

Probable cause and the Fourth Amendment: a much undefined constitutional safeguard

Exploring evidentiary reasoning in Chile: a preliminary study of judicial intuitions about tort

Conjectures and Refutations

The Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial: Truth, Proof, and Rights

Science for Legal Proceedings

The graphotechnical test: fundamentals, validity and reliability

Iuris prudentia

Proving gender identity. Some reflections on the case SUP-JDC-304/2018 and others

Full Issue

PDF

Index

Presentación

Essays

Fundamental Rights, Judicial Discretion and Criminal Process: How the Regulation of Rights Affects the Achievement of the Procedure Goals

Philosophy of Mind and proof of mental facts

Epistemic Justification, Robust Evidentialism, Legal Proof

Evidence, Standards and Burdens of Proof in the European Asylum System: A New Field for Evidence Scholars?

"Let Me Cross the Wind With Documents": Proposals for Rethinking Documents Used as Evidence

The distinction between proof and preparatory access to information in civil procedure

Evidential Powers of Amparo Judges. A guarantor of the epistemic correctness of the facts

On the effectiveness of the Istanbul and Minnesota protocols in the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Conjectures and Refutations

Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence: a Reply to Pardo, Spellman, Muffato, and Enoch

PCAST's Report: Forensic Science in Criminal Courts

Report to the President. Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods

Science for Legal Proceedings

(Un-)Interpretability in Expert Evidence: An Inquiry into the Frontiers of Evidential Assessment

Iuris prudentia

The proof of intentional discrimination in Argentina’s Supreme Court jurisprudence. How to improve its regulation?

Full Issue

PDF

Index

Michele Taruffo, in memoriam / La torre de Babel (castellano)

Michele Taruffo, in memoriam / The Tower of Babel (english)

Michele Taruffo, in memoriam / La torre di Babele (italiano)

Michele Taruffo, in memoriam / A torre de Babel (português)

Essays

A Critical Method for the Evaluation of Evidence: François Gorphe’s (1889-1959) Contribution to a Science of Proof à la française

Behavioral Predictability and Criminal Proceedings : Some Notes on the Epistemic Foundation of Future Events in Precautionary Measures

Evidence Assessment and Standards of Proof: a Messy Issue

Rethinking «Maxims of Experience»

Deciding About Facts in Trial Avoiding Mechanisms

The Relationship Between the Criminal Justice System Practices and the Determination of the Standard of Proof

A privacidade digital posta à prova no processo penal

Conjectures and Refutations

Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence Revisited

How to Theorize About Statistical Evidence (and Really, about Everything Else): A Comment on Allen

Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence: Methodological Reflections

Strong, Weak, or Apparent Naturalization? Relative Plausibility Theory and Conceptual Analysis

In Defense of Weird Hypotheticals

Single Victim's Testimony and Gender Perspective in the Criminal Procedure (2). Response to Refutations (of Quaestio facti, 1 2020)

Science for Legal Proceedings

Contributions of Psychology Beyond the Expert Evidence

Iuris prudentia

Should We Prove Hate? Some Comments on Diana Sacayán's Case

Full Issue

PDF

Index

Presentation

Essays

Judging Expert Testimony: From Verbal Formalism to Practical Advice

Unavailable witnesses and confrontation: epistemic and non-epistemic foundations

Quaestio facti e Quaestio iuris

Reading evidence: on some questionable case-law clichés

The preparation of trial stage and its role in the admissibility of evidence in Chile

Scientific Questions of Fact Between Free Evaluation of Evidence and Proof Beyond any Reasonable Doubt in the Criminal Trial

Illegaly obtained evidence and the bifurcated criminal court

Conjectures and Refutations

Single victim's testimony and gender perspective in the criminal procedure

Remarks on single testimony in cases regarding gender's violence

The guarantee of the adversary system and the single victim's testimony

Gender perspective in the criminal procedure: refutation? of some conjectures held in Ramírez Ortiz paper's "Single victim's testimony and gender perspective in the criminal procedure"

A gender perspective on evidence. A critical asessment

Science for Legal Proceedings

Unreliable law: legal responses to latent fingerprint evidence

Iuris prudentia

On the justification duty of the findings of fact and the jury trials: the ruling V.R.P., V.P.C. y otros vs. Nicaragua