Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T05:23:07.991Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - Evidence as a Multidisciplinary Field

What Do the Law and the Discipline of Law Have to Offer?

from Part I - Evidence As an Area of Knowledge

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2022

By
William Twining
Edited by
Jordi Ferrer Beltrán  and
Carmen Vázquez
Jordi Ferrer Beltrán
Affiliation:
Universitat de Girona
Carmen Vázquez
Affiliation:
Universitat de Girona
Get access

Summary

My concern here is with articulating what Law as a discipline or the subject matters that it studies may have to offer to a distinct and semi-autonomous multi-disciplinary field. However, it is worth emphasising that throughout history, and especially in the twentieth century, our discipline has been quite open to outside influences in respect of evidence. I am personally interested in finding practical ways forward, although this paper addresses a more intellectual question: What might we as jurists, and our heritage of both theory and practical decision-making, contribute to an enterprise devoted to stimulating cross-fertilisation, co-operation and the search for a reasonably common core or family of cross-disciplinary relations for Evidence as a recognised multi-disciplinary field?

Keywords

Evidenceinferencenarrativemulti-disciplinary studieslaw of evidencelogic of proofpolice investigationforensic scienceintelligence analysiscommon sense
Type
Chapter
Information
Evidential Legal Reasoning
Crossing Civil Law and Common Law Traditions
 , pp. 13 - 33
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, R. (2021). New Directions of Evidence Science, in Vázquez, C. and Ferrer, J. Beltrán, eds., Evidential Legal Reasoning, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, T., Schum, D. and Twining, W. (2005). Analysis of Evidence, 2nd ed., Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentham, J. (1837–43). An Introductory View of the Rationale of the Law of Evidence for Use by Non-lawyers as well as Lawyers (ed. James Mill, circa 1810). VI Works 1–187. Bowring edition, 1837–43. Edinburgh: William Tait.Google Scholar
Calvino, I. (1974). Invisible Cities. Weaver, W. translator, New York: Harcourt Brace and Company.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1977). The Probable and the Provable, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1981). Can Human Irrationality be Experimentally Demonstrated?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4 (3), 317–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damaška, M. (1986). The Faces of Justice and State Authority, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dawid, P., Twining, W. and Vasilaki, M. (2011). Evidence, Inference and Enquiry, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Diamond, S. and Lempert, R. (2018). When Law Calls, Does Science Answer? A Survey of Distinguished Scientists and Engineers, Daedalus, 147 (4), 41–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking Rights Seriously, London: Gerald Duckworth and Co. Ltd.Google Scholar
Ferrer, J. (2007). La valoración racional de la prueba, Madrid: Marcial Pons.Google Scholar
Gascón, M. (2010). Los hechos en el derecho. Bases argumentales de la prueba. 3rd ed., Madrid: Marcial Pons.Google Scholar
Gaskins, R. (1992). Burdens of Proof in Modern Discourse, New York: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Gilbert, J. (1754). The Law of Evidence. Dublin: P. Byrne.Google Scholar
Haack, S. (1993). Evidence and Inquiry: Towards Reconstruction in Epistemology. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Haack, S. (2014). Evidence Matters, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacking, I. (1975). The Emergence of Probability, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hazard, G. and Taruffo, M. (1993). American Civil Procedure: An Introduction, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Ho, J. L. (2015). The Legal Concept of Evidence, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2015/entries/evidence-legal/.Google Scholar
Howlett, P. and Morgan, M. (2010). How Well Do Facts Travel? The Dissemination of Reliable Knowledge, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, J. and Summers, S. (2012). The Internationalisation of Criminal Evidence: Beyond the Common Law and Civil Law Traditions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazdin, A. E. ed. (2000). Encyclopedia of Psychology, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Llewellyn, K. and Hoebel, E. (1941). The Cheyenne Way. Conflict and Case Law in Primitive Jurisprudence, Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Lloyd-Bostock, S. M. (1980). Psychology in Legal Contexts: Applications and Limitations, Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
Maitland, F. (2011). The Collected Papers of Frederic William Maitland, Fisher, H. A. L. ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Memon, A., Vrij, A. and Bull, R. (2003). Psychology and Law: Truthfulness, Accuracy and Credibility, Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Michael, J. and Adler, M. (1931). The Nature of Judicial Proof: An Inquiry into the Logical, Legal and Empirical Aspects of the Law of Evidence (private printing).Google Scholar
Postema, G. (1983). Facts, Fictions and Law: Bentham on the Foundations of Evidence, in Twining, W. ed., Facts in Law, Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
Roberts, P. and Zuckerman, A. (2010). Criminal Evidence, 3rd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Santos, B. (1995). Toward a New Common Sense: Law, Science and Politics in the Paradigmatic Transition. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schofield, P. (2006). Utility and Democracy: The Political Thought of Jeremy Bentham. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schum, D. (1994/2001). Evidential Foundations of Probabilistic Reasoning. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Swift, E. (2000). One Hundred Years of Evidence Law Reform: Thayer’s Triumph. California Law Review, 88 (6), 2437–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taruffo, M. (1992). La prova dei fatti giuridici. Milan: Giuffre.Google Scholar
Tecuci, G., Schum, D., Marcu, D., and Boicu, M., (2016). Intelligence Analysis As Discovery of Evidence, Hypotheses, and Arguments: Connecting the Dots, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thayer, J. (1898). A Preliminary Treatise on Evidence at Common Law. Boston, MA: Little Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Tillers, P. (1983). Modern Theories of Relevancy, Wigmore on Evidence, 1-1A, Boston, MA: Little Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Toulmin, S. (1964). The Uses of Argument, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Twining, W. (1985). Theories of Evidence: Bentham and Wigmore, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
Twining, W. (2006). Rethinking Evidence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Twining, W. (2019). Jurist in Context. A Memoir, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Twining, W. and Monk, I., eds. (2003). Evidence and Inference in History and Law, Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Twining, W. and Quick, E. (1994). Legal Records in the Commonwealth, Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishing Co. Ltd.Google Scholar
Vergès, E., Vial, G. and Leclerc, O. (2015). Droit de la preuve. París: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Wigmore, J. H. (1913). The Principles of Judicial Proof as Given by Logic, Psychology and General Experience, Boston, MA: Little Brown and Company. 3rd ed., 1937. Sub Nom the Science of Judicial Proof.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, A. (1986). Law, Fact or Justice? Boston University Law Review, 66, 487–508.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×