Affiliation:
1. Lehman College, City University of New York
Abstract
Abstract
Smith (2018) argues that, unlike other forms of evidence, naked statistical evidence fails to satisfy normic support. This is his solution to the puzzles of statistical evidence in legal proof. This paper focuses on Smith’s claim that DNA evidence in cold-hit cases does not satisfy normic support. I argue that if this claim is correct, virtually no other form of evidence used at trial can satisfy normic support. This is troublesome. I discuss a few ways in which Smith can respond.
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Reference36 articles.
1. ‘Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence’;Allen;Virginia Law Review,2001
2. Disjunction Between Probability and Verdict in Juror Decision Making’;Arkes;Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,2012
3. Sensitivity, Causality, and Statistical Evidence in Courts of Law’;Blome-Tillmann;Thought: A Journal of Philosophy,2015
4. ‘Reconceptualizing the Burden of Proof’;Cheng;Yale Law Journal,2013
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献