Evaluation of evidence: pre-modern and modern approaches
"Judges were never bound by law to convict a defendant unless they considered him guilty. Yet, they could be prohibited by law from convicting a person they consider guilty due to the absence of legally prescribed or the presence of legally prohibited evidence.Evaluation of Evidence addresses t...
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Cambridge, United Kingdom
Cambridge University Press
2018
|
| Schriftenreihe: | ASCL studies in comparative law
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Zusammenfassung: | "Judges were never bound by law to convict a defendant unless they considered him guilty. Yet, they could be prohibited by law from convicting a person they consider guilty due to the absence of legally prescribed or the presence of legally prohibited evidence.Evaluation of Evidence addresses the question: should the law restrict the freedom of judges in assessing the probative value of evidence in the criminal process? Tracing the treatment of evidence from pre-modern to modern times, Mirjan Damaška argues that there has always been some understanding about rules regarding the use and treatment of evidence, and these rules should not be looked askance as a departure from ideal arrangements. In a time when science and technology have the ability to contribute to factual inquiry, there needs to be acceptance of rules that expand or corroborate evidence produced by our native sensory apparatus"... "Should the law restrain the freedom of the trier of facts to determine the value of evidence in criminal cases? This question intensely preoccupied nineteenth-century lawyers. On the continent of Europe, the triggering event for mulling it over was the challenge which the French revolutionary idea of free evaluation of evidence presented to traditional legal proof rules of Roman-canon origin. In England, responsible for stirring the debate was Jeremy Bentham's scathing critique of the subjection of fact- finding activity to legal regulation. Although his primary target was rules on the admissibility of evidence, he also lambasted rules of weight. In the battle over the fate of the ancien regime's justice system, which relied on legal proof rules, the debate became politicized and acrimonious. As the conceptual scaffolding for this debate, continental legal theorists posited a stark contrast between two fact-finding schemes - one rejecting and the other adopting legal constraints on the fact-finders' assessment of the value of evidence. English jurors were placed in the former and continental professional judges in the latter scheme. In this Manichaean opposition, English jurors appeared completely free from legal constraints, while continental judges seemed like robotic implementers of Roman-canon rules on the quantity and quality of evidence, required to arrive at factual findings irrespective of their personal assessment of evidence. This opposition was accepted as true in common law countries and became the dominant account of how factual findings were made on the continent during the ancien regime"... |
| Beschreibung: | Includes bibliographical references and index |
| Beschreibung: | 160 Seiten |
| ISBN: | 9781108497282 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV046958027 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 00000000000000.0 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 201024s2018 xxk |||| 00||| eng d | ||
| 020 | |a 9781108497282 |9 978-1-108-49728-2 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV046958027 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rda | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a eng | |
| 044 | |a xxk |c GB | ||
| 049 | |a DE-19 | ||
| 082 | 0 | |a 347/.06 |2 23 | |
| 100 | 1 | |a Damaška, Mirjan R. |d 1931- |0 (DE-588)141219343 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Evaluation of evidence |b pre-modern and modern approaches |c Mirjan Damaška, Yale University, Connecticut |
| 264 | 1 | |a Cambridge, United Kingdom |b Cambridge University Press |c 2018 | |
| 300 | |a 160 Seiten | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 0 | |a ASCL studies in comparative law | |
| 500 | |a Includes bibliographical references and index | ||
| 520 | |a "Judges were never bound by law to convict a defendant unless they considered him guilty. Yet, they could be prohibited by law from convicting a person they consider guilty due to the absence of legally prescribed or the presence of legally prohibited evidence.Evaluation of Evidence addresses the question: should the law restrict the freedom of judges in assessing the probative value of evidence in the criminal process? Tracing the treatment of evidence from pre-modern to modern times, Mirjan Damaška argues that there has always been some understanding about rules regarding the use and treatment of evidence, and these rules should not be looked askance as a departure from ideal arrangements. In a time when science and technology have the ability to contribute to factual inquiry, there needs to be acceptance of rules that expand or corroborate evidence produced by our native sensory apparatus"... | ||
| 520 | |a "Should the law restrain the freedom of the trier of facts to determine the value of evidence in criminal cases? This question intensely preoccupied nineteenth-century lawyers. On the continent of Europe, the triggering event for mulling it over was the challenge which the French revolutionary idea of free evaluation of evidence presented to traditional legal proof rules of Roman-canon origin. In England, responsible for stirring the debate was Jeremy Bentham's scathing critique of the subjection of fact- finding activity to legal regulation. Although his primary target was rules on the admissibility of evidence, he also lambasted rules of weight. In the battle over the fate of the ancien regime's justice system, which relied on legal proof rules, the debate became politicized and acrimonious. As the conceptual scaffolding for this debate, continental legal theorists posited a stark contrast between two fact-finding schemes - one rejecting and the other adopting legal constraints on the fact-finders' assessment of the value of evidence. English jurors were placed in the former and continental professional judges in the latter scheme. In this Manichaean opposition, English jurors appeared completely free from legal constraints, while continental judges seemed like robotic implementers of Roman-canon rules on the quantity and quality of evidence, required to arrive at factual findings irrespective of their personal assessment of evidence. This opposition was accepted as true in common law countries and became the dominant account of how factual findings were made on the continent during the ancien regime"... | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a LAW / Evidence / bisacsh | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Evidence (Law) | |
| 650 | 4 | |a LAW / Evidence | |
| 776 | 0 | 8 | |i Erscheint auch als |n Online-Ausgabe |z 9781108667326 |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-032366425 | ||
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804181874883428352 |
|---|---|
| adam_txt | |
| any_adam_object | |
| any_adam_object_boolean | |
| author | Damaška, Mirjan R. 1931- |
| author_GND | (DE-588)141219343 |
| author_facet | Damaška, Mirjan R. 1931- |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Damaška, Mirjan R. 1931- |
| author_variant | m r d mr mrd |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV046958027 |
| ctrlnum | (DE-599)BVBBV046958027 |
| dewey-full | 347/.06 |
| dewey-hundreds | 300 - Social sciences |
| dewey-ones | 347 - Procedure and courts |
| dewey-raw | 347/.06 |
| dewey-search | 347/.06 |
| dewey-sort | 3347 16 |
| dewey-tens | 340 - Law |
| discipline | Rechtswissenschaft |
| discipline_str_mv | Rechtswissenschaft |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>03674nam a2200361 c 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV046958027</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">00000000000000.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201024s2018 xxk |||| 00||| eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9781108497282</subfield><subfield code="9">978-1-108-49728-2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV046958027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="044" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">xxk</subfield><subfield code="c">GB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-19</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">347/.06</subfield><subfield code="2">23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Damaška, Mirjan R.</subfield><subfield code="d">1931-</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)141219343</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Evaluation of evidence</subfield><subfield code="b">pre-modern and modern approaches</subfield><subfield code="c">Mirjan Damaška, Yale University, Connecticut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Cambridge, United Kingdom</subfield><subfield code="b">Cambridge University Press</subfield><subfield code="c">2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">160 Seiten</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ASCL studies in comparative law</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Includes bibliographical references and index</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">"Judges were never bound by law to convict a defendant unless they considered him guilty. Yet, they could be prohibited by law from convicting a person they consider guilty due to the absence of legally prescribed or the presence of legally prohibited evidence.Evaluation of Evidence addresses the question: should the law restrict the freedom of judges in assessing the probative value of evidence in the criminal process? Tracing the treatment of evidence from pre-modern to modern times, Mirjan Dama&#353;ka argues that there has always been some understanding about rules regarding the use and treatment of evidence, and these rules should not be looked askance as a departure from ideal arrangements. In a time when science and technology have the ability to contribute to factual inquiry, there needs to be acceptance of rules that expand or corroborate evidence produced by our native sensory apparatus"...</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">"Should the law restrain the freedom of the trier of facts to determine the value of evidence in criminal cases? This question intensely preoccupied nineteenth-century lawyers. On the continent of Europe, the triggering event for mulling it over was the challenge which the French revolutionary idea of free evaluation of evidence presented to traditional legal proof rules of Roman-canon origin. In England, responsible for stirring the debate was Jeremy Bentham's scathing critique of the subjection of fact- finding activity to legal regulation. Although his primary target was rules on the admissibility of evidence, he also lambasted rules of weight. In the battle over the fate of the ancien regime's justice system, which relied on legal proof rules, the debate became politicized and acrimonious. As the conceptual scaffolding for this debate, continental legal theorists posited a stark contrast between two fact-finding schemes - one rejecting and the other adopting legal constraints on the fact-finders' assessment of the value of evidence. English jurors were placed in the former and continental professional judges in the latter scheme. In this Manichaean opposition, English jurors appeared completely free from legal constraints, while continental judges seemed like robotic implementers of Roman-canon rules on the quantity and quality of evidence, required to arrive at factual findings irrespective of their personal assessment of evidence. This opposition was accepted as true in common law countries and became the dominant account of how factual findings were made on the continent during the ancien regime"...</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">LAW / Evidence / bisacsh</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Evidence (Law)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">LAW / Evidence</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="776" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Erscheint auch als</subfield><subfield code="n">Online-Ausgabe</subfield><subfield code="z">9781108667326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-032366425</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| id | DE-604.BV046958027 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| index_date | 2024-07-03T15:43:13Z |
| indexdate | 2024-07-10T08:58:36Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9781108497282 |
| language | English |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-032366425 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-19 DE-BY-UBM |
| owner_facet | DE-19 DE-BY-UBM |
| physical | 160 Seiten |
| publishDate | 2018 |
| publishDateSearch | 2018 |
| publishDateSort | 2018 |
| publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| record_format | marc |
| series2 | ASCL studies in comparative law |
| spelling | Damaška, Mirjan R. 1931- (DE-588)141219343 aut Evaluation of evidence pre-modern and modern approaches Mirjan Damaška, Yale University, Connecticut Cambridge, United Kingdom Cambridge University Press 2018 160 Seiten txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier ASCL studies in comparative law Includes bibliographical references and index "Judges were never bound by law to convict a defendant unless they considered him guilty. Yet, they could be prohibited by law from convicting a person they consider guilty due to the absence of legally prescribed or the presence of legally prohibited evidence.Evaluation of Evidence addresses the question: should the law restrict the freedom of judges in assessing the probative value of evidence in the criminal process? Tracing the treatment of evidence from pre-modern to modern times, Mirjan Damaška argues that there has always been some understanding about rules regarding the use and treatment of evidence, and these rules should not be looked askance as a departure from ideal arrangements. In a time when science and technology have the ability to contribute to factual inquiry, there needs to be acceptance of rules that expand or corroborate evidence produced by our native sensory apparatus"... "Should the law restrain the freedom of the trier of facts to determine the value of evidence in criminal cases? This question intensely preoccupied nineteenth-century lawyers. On the continent of Europe, the triggering event for mulling it over was the challenge which the French revolutionary idea of free evaluation of evidence presented to traditional legal proof rules of Roman-canon origin. In England, responsible for stirring the debate was Jeremy Bentham's scathing critique of the subjection of fact- finding activity to legal regulation. Although his primary target was rules on the admissibility of evidence, he also lambasted rules of weight. In the battle over the fate of the ancien regime's justice system, which relied on legal proof rules, the debate became politicized and acrimonious. As the conceptual scaffolding for this debate, continental legal theorists posited a stark contrast between two fact-finding schemes - one rejecting and the other adopting legal constraints on the fact-finders' assessment of the value of evidence. English jurors were placed in the former and continental professional judges in the latter scheme. In this Manichaean opposition, English jurors appeared completely free from legal constraints, while continental judges seemed like robotic implementers of Roman-canon rules on the quantity and quality of evidence, required to arrive at factual findings irrespective of their personal assessment of evidence. This opposition was accepted as true in common law countries and became the dominant account of how factual findings were made on the continent during the ancien regime"... LAW / Evidence / bisacsh Evidence (Law) LAW / Evidence Erscheint auch als Online-Ausgabe 9781108667326 |
| spellingShingle | Damaška, Mirjan R. 1931- Evaluation of evidence pre-modern and modern approaches LAW / Evidence / bisacsh Evidence (Law) LAW / Evidence |
| title | Evaluation of evidence pre-modern and modern approaches |
| title_auth | Evaluation of evidence pre-modern and modern approaches |
| title_exact_search | Evaluation of evidence pre-modern and modern approaches |
| title_exact_search_txtP | Evaluation of evidence pre-modern and modern approaches |
| title_full | Evaluation of evidence pre-modern and modern approaches Mirjan Damaška, Yale University, Connecticut |
| title_fullStr | Evaluation of evidence pre-modern and modern approaches Mirjan Damaška, Yale University, Connecticut |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of evidence pre-modern and modern approaches Mirjan Damaška, Yale University, Connecticut |
| title_short | Evaluation of evidence |
| title_sort | evaluation of evidence pre modern and modern approaches |
| title_sub | pre-modern and modern approaches |
| topic | LAW / Evidence / bisacsh Evidence (Law) LAW / Evidence |
| topic_facet | LAW / Evidence / bisacsh Evidence (Law) LAW / Evidence |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT damaskamirjanr evaluationofevidencepremodernandmodernapproaches |