Evidence Law

Brilliant Essays
Judge: “Am I not to hear the truth?”
Objecting Counsel: “No, Your Lordship is to hear the evidence. ”

Evidence law is a mixture of principles, rules, guidelines and discretions. Jeremy Bentham legal theorist, stated it thus; ‘The field of evidence is no other than the field of knowledge’. The law of evidence is a critical subject for any lawyer or indeed party to a proceedings, who is concerned with investigation or the conduct of trials. The law of evidence is essentially about, the facts or materials that, are admissible to prove something that is in dispute.
The John Figgis exercise took a theoretically erudite, but real-world look at how facts that, may establish evidence are employed to substantiate certain results in a law settings.
…show more content…
Wigmore developed his mapping system for legal argumentation. But when I first approached the task, I felt ‘out of my depths’ and frankly, I was thoroughly confused. I am not a visual learner; my preferred learning style is auditory. Having to construct the chart was challenging, the first task for me was to find a suitable programme to use to construct the diagram, and this proved easier said than done. Microsoft word offers a number of illustration options with its standard package and I opted to use smart chart, but it took me several hours to find one that, could chart the facts and evidence in the way that, I wanted to. I did not find one that, was on point and so I settled on one that, could best serve my needs under the circumstances. It was a compromise, and I found it impossible to manipulate it to serve my needs. Andrew Palmer writing in the Sydney law review, holds a different view, stating that ‘…software is both easy to use and capable of capturing a variety of different logical relationships between evidence and proposition… ’ Here, however, Palmer seems to be referring to a specific type of software, but he does not say what it is. In any case, given my difficulties, with this type of software, I am not sure that, I would have fared any better had I had …show more content…
I recall when I read McLoughlin v O’Brien , that, my eyes, pricked with tears and that, by the time I had read the facts, I knew (almost instinctively) what the outcome should be; and whilst I lacked the level and quality of legal reasoning employed by Lord Scarman and his colleagues, I did nonetheless arrive at the same outcome, notwithstanding the prevailing case law. I have support in Phillip Brooks who argues that, ‘law needs narrative

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    However ambiguity arises in the argument that there is or that there should be a third standard. Another important complication to this area of the law arises when considering civil circumstances that may result in criminal sanctions. This is something that will also be considered in detail throughout this essay, and would cause me to argue that the law in this area is not clear and straightforward. In criminal cases the crown must prove the accused committed offence beyond reasonable doubt. In some cases there is a persuasive burden on accused, this discharged by proof on the balance of probabilities.…

    • 1066 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Judicial Decision Making

    • 1913 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Does a judge simply just apply rules to the facts of the case? Of course, “the importance of rules as a basic building block of law can hardly be doubted,” but it is argued that judicial discretion can also be a powerful tool when it comes to making judgements within the law. There are differing schools of thought on how far a judge can input their own views and in my essay, I will discuss whether legal rules and a judge’s…

    • 1913 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Justice Macalia Textualism

    • 1571 Words
    • 7 Pages

    As argued by Judge Richard A. Posner, strict constructionism, or what he refers to as “legal formalism” adheres to principles of the law that are “too narrow” (O’Brien 204). Judge Posner further argues that in legal formalism, the text of the law is meant “to decide whether the right exists,” as they are written in the Constitution (O’Brien 204). By that account, although strict constructionism only reads the text and uses a literal meaning, it still applies the literal intent of the law. For that reason, Judge Posner argues that when using the element of meaning, Judges cannot make their decisions by reading the text directly (O’Brien 207). As Judge Posner states, the Constitution does not say, “read me broadly or read me narrowly” (O’Brien 207), as to suggest that the meaning of the text should not be interpreted…

    • 1571 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    According to substantive viewpoint, rationality occurs when law making and law finding reflect general norms that exist outside the contours of legal principles and logical generalizations of law itself. Law is considered to…

    • 918 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The rules or standards, associated with positivism require that the judge follows predetermined principles and routes when interpreting the law and evidence. The two main principles that must be used when assessing legalities are whether or not it is a) not part of a valid law or b) apart of a valid law. Dworkin instead “rejec[ed] the positivist conceptions of law and interpretation, instead of theorizing that rights are premised upon a comprehensive set of moral precepts that make individual rights valuable, and act as ‘trumps’”. Essentially that it responds to the unique values and sensitivities of the judge when applying the…

    • 1075 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He advises that the individual states general ideas, they also need to have evidence backing their proposition, in this case memories, testimony, or other forms of evidence is reliable (Ayer, p. 32). Ayer himself thought that this was too difficult of a task, that the correct standard to set for claims to knowledge was to be decided reasonably. One has the right to be sure even when the possibility that they may be wrong is…

    • 1027 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    ‘If, for instance, the facts found by the tribunal are such as to justify the decision even on a correct interpretation of the statutory criterion, then normally there would be no ground for interference’ ; and (c) ‘where the power is of a discretionary nature, the general approach to establishing the intention of the legislature might be different’ . ‘‘Discretionary’ nature would be a situation in which the tribunal…

    • 1958 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Precedent cannot be just on the Obiter, but neither Irrelevant as a proposition, only in applying the Ratio to those material facts. The disadvantage is that persuasion is applied to the Obiter to the extent of applying it as though it is law with the Ratios. The Obiter dicta however is influential only as a persuasion on future cases and not legally binding on the ratio. The English justice system consists of two types of Judicial Precedent. That being Persuasive and Binding.…

    • 1215 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    I also noticed I did poorly on my quizzes when I didn’t take the time to make sure I went through all the questions. An example of this was in the week 1 and 2 quiz I submitted my quiz without making sure I answered all the questions. I noticed that I had this time management problem early in the semester, so I started to do things to help myself with it. I bought a white board and used the black marker for deadlines and the blue marker for when I would work on those things. This helped me tremendously because I was able to break down when and what time I would do things.…

    • 1200 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Morally Unworthy Lawyer

    • 867 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The first principle of partisanship holds that lawyers are partisan advocates for their clients that means the lawyer puts his or her client’s interests above all else . This principle can also be interpreted as in the textbook, “lawyers are required to seek to miximise the likelihood that a client will prevail” and “to advance their clients’ partisan interests with the maximum zeal permitted by law” . The exception of this principle is that the lawyers “must act within recognized constraints of legality or professional ethics." It is my belief that, as the question stated, due to the client has “valid legal claim”, it means the case involves serious legal issues and it is arguable; in addition, it is lawful correct. Thus, the solicitor should use his or her professional skills to represent the client who justified “morally unworthy” to the…

    • 867 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays