Evidence Commons^™

Saidi Banda V The People Scz Appeal No. 114 Of 2015), Mwaka Chizinga

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Omar Effendi Vs. Union Fenosa: Corruption As A Transnational Public Policy Consideration, Ahmed Badr Eldin

Theses and Dissertations

At the beginning of 2011, Egypt witnessed radical political developments that led to the emergence of a pressing tendency to adjudicate the collapsed regime’s policies and practices. Shortly thereafter, the Egyptian State Council issued a number of judicial decisions that confirmed that the sale of the privatized governmental enterprises had been tainted by corruption. Crucially, the Court maintained that flagrant breach of law, regulations, and administrative orders that encompassed these transactions created serious suspicions about corruption committed by public officials and investors. It concluded that the existence of corruption, as a transnational public policy consideration, had deprived foreign investors of …

State V. Jenks Fails To Clarify Appellate Standards Of Evidence Review In Ohio, Kevin L. Leffel

Akron Law Review

The analysis that follows focuses on two points. First, many reviewing courts in Ohio have failed to discern between reversing a conviction because it was against the manifest weight of the evidence and reversing because the evidence was not sufficient to support the conviction. The concepts and associated standards of review are separate and distinct. Jenks failed to clarify the distinction and may actually add to the confusion. Second, the elimination of the circumstantial evidence rule has implications concerning the definition of reasonable doubt in Ohio.

Common Ignorance: Medical Malpractice Law And The Misconceived Application Of The “Common Knowledge” And “Res Ipsa Loquitur” Doctrines, Amanda E. Spinner

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Seeing Is Believing: The Anti-Inference Bias, Eyal Zamir Prof., Ilana Ritov, Doron Teichman

Indiana Law Journal

A large body of studies suggests that people are reluctant to impose liability on the basis of circumstantial evidence alone, even when this evidence is more reliable than direct evidence. Current explanations for this pattern of behavior focus on factors such as the tendency of fact finders to assign low subjective probabilities to circumstantial evidence, the statistical nature of such evidence, and the fact that direct evidence can rule out with greater ease any competing factual theory regarding liability. This Article describes a set of four new experiments demonstrating that even when these factors are controlled for, the disinclination to …

The Cognitive Psychology Of Circumstantial Evidence, Kevin Jon Heller

Michigan Law Review

Empirical research indicates that jurors routinely undervalue circumstantial evidence (DNA, fingerprints, and the like) and overvalue direct evidence (eyewitness identifications and confessions) when making verdict choices, even though false-conviction statistics indicate that the former is normally more probative and more reliable than the latter The traditional explanation of this paradox, based on the probability-threshold model of jury decision-making, is that jurors simply do not understand circumstantial evidence and thus routinely underestimate its effect on the objective probability of the defendant's guilt. That may be true in some situations, but it fails to account for what is known in cognitive psychology …

Evidence -- 1964 Tennessee Survey, Lyman R. Patterson

Vanderbilt Law Review

The difficulty in dealing with presumptions arises in part from the fact that the term embraces a host of different meanings, varying with the purposes underlying the presumption in a given situation. Unfortunately, the courts seldom articulate the meaning which they are attributing to the term and consequently do little to clear up the confusion... In Arnett v. Fuston, a negligence action, plaintiff argued that a verdict of not guilty against one of the two co-defendants was not supported by any evidence, and that a presumption should apply against him "for his election to stand on his motion for directed …

Logical Or Legal Relevancy -- A Conflict In Theory, Herman L. Trautman

Vanderbilt Law Review

Is there a rational theory which serves as a basis for determining the admissibility of circumstantial evidence?

Circumstantial evidence involves the offer in evidence of Fact A for the purpose of having the trier of fact (jury, judge, administrative agency or arbitrator) first believe that Fact A is true, and from it infer the existence or truth of Fact B. Fact B may be one of the ultimate questions of factor propositions raised by the pleadings, or it may be a more remote fact or proposition which when established, again forms the basis for a further inference in the chain …

Evidence Of Survivorship In Common Disaster Cases, John E. Tracy, John J. Adams

Michigan Law Review

Almost daily, newspapers recount the details of another automobile accident or airplane crash in which numerous persons are killed--a common disaster. And determination of survivorship in common disaster cases presents some of the most vexing problems that lawyers and judges meet. Lawyers must search for evidence, frequently hard to obtain, and then must face difficult questions of relevancy, materiality, and probative value, since in almost all cases where any evidence is available it is wholly circumstantial. Judges must decide preliminary disputes over who shall bear the burden of proof, and then must rule on the sufficiency of evidence, which is …

Effect Of The Doctrine Of Res Ipsa Loquitur, Fowler V. Harper, Fred E. Heckel

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.