University of Girona
Quaestio facti. Revista internacional sobre razonamiento probatorioNot a member yet
115 research outputs found
Sort by
A Raison d'Être for the Judicial Process: An Analysis from the Spanish Procedural System
Get PDFSeveral Spanish authors have conceptualised the judicial process as a forced and inevitable temporal evolution that must precede the resolution of the controversy and that depends on slowness —as the antithesis of immediacy—. According to this doctrine, this process aims to avoid an immediate judicial response. In this paper, I will examine why the judicial process has been defined in this way; the reasons why speed is not desirable in the judicial function. To this end, I draw on the findings of cognitive psychology and, more specifically, on a set of theories that support the existence of two ways of processing information —two ways of knowing, believing, thinking, reasoning, and acting—: one fast and one slow; these are the dual processing theories. As a result of this confrontation, I propose a rationale, a purpose, and a definition for the judicial process, which are based on the idea that the presence of a time interval is necessary for the right to judicial impartiality and the right of defence to —materially— exist.Several Spanish authors have conceptualised the judicial process as a forced and inevitable temporal evolution that must precede the resolution of the controversy and that depends on slowness —as the antithesis of immediacy—. According to this doctrine, this process aims to avoid an immediate judicial response. In this paper, I will examine why the judicial process has been defined in this way; the reasons why speed is not desirable in the judicial function. To this end, I draw on the findings of cognitive psychology and, more specifically, on a set of theories that support the existence of two ways of processing information —two ways of knowing, believing, thinking, reasoning, and acting—: one fast and one slow; these are the dual processing theories. As a result of this confrontation, I propose a rationale, a purpose, and a definition for the judicial process, which are based on the idea that the presence of a time interval is necessary for the right to judicial impartiality and the right of defence to —materially— exist.Several Spanish authors have conceptualised the judicial process as a forced and inevitable temporal evolution that must precede the resolution of the controversy and that depends on slowness —as the antithesis of immediacy—. According to this doctrine, this process aims to avoid an immediate judicial response. In this paper, I will examine why the judicial process has been defined in this way; the reasons why speed is not desirable in the judicial function. To this end, I draw on the findings of cognitive psychology and, more specifically, on a set of theories that support the existence of two ways of processing information —two ways of knowing, believing, thinking, reasoning, and acting—: one fast and one slow; these are the dual processing theories. As a result of this confrontation, I propose a rationale, a purpose, and a definition for the judicial process, which are based on the idea that the presence of a time interval is necessary for the right to judicial impartiality and the right of defence to —materially— exist.Several Spanish authors have conceptualised the judicial process as a forced and inevitable temporal evolution that must precede the resolution of the controversy and that depends on slowness —as the antithesis of immediacy—. According to this doctrine, this process aims to avoid an immediate judicial response. In this paper, I will examine why the judicial process has been defined in this way; the reasons why speed is not desirable in the judicial function. To this end, I draw on the findings of cognitive psychology and, more specifically, on a set of theories that support the existence of two ways of processing information —two ways of knowing, believing, thinking, reasoning, and acting—: one fast and one slow; these are the dual processing theories. As a result of this confrontation, I propose a rationale, a purpose, and a definition for the judicial process, which are based on the idea that the presence of a time interval is necessary for the right to judicial impartiality and the right of defence to —materially— exist
An Account of Events, by Definition, Involves an Understanding of the Actors: A prova na arbitragem comercial internacional
Get PDFWhat could justify the paper on evidence in international commercial arbitration? What is so peculiar about this instance of the realisation of the law that it explains the autonomy of the subject of evidence when it takes place in international commercial arbitration? Isn't the general theory of evidence applicable to the demonstration of reality in a certain type of proceedings – arbitral proceedings – whenever they concern commercial and plurilocalised disputes?
These are the central questions around which the text will gravitate. We will emphasise what we believe to be the determining factor in the development of a praxis that does not cause a break between the general theory of evidence developed for civil cases tried in state courts and the central vectors of evidence as known in international commercial arbitration: the context of the exercise of jurisdiction.O que pode justificar a publicação de um texto sobre a prova na arbitragem comercial internacional? O que haverá de peculiar nesta instância de realização do Direito que explique a autonomização da matéria da prova tal quando realizada em arbitragem comercial internacional? Não será a teoria geral da prova aplicável à demonstração da realidade num certo tipo de processos – os processos arbitrais – sempre que estes respeitem a litígios comerciais e plurilocalizados?
Estas as questões centrais, em torno das quais gravitará o texto. Acentuaremos aquele que julgamos ser o factor determinante no desenvolvimento de uma praxis que, não provocando uma ruptura entre a teoria geral da prova, desenvolvida para os processos civis julgados em tribunais estaduais, e os vectores centrais da prova, tal como conhecidos na arbitragem comercial internacional: o contexto do exercício da jurisdição.O que pode justificar a publicação de um texto sobre a prova na arbitragem comercial internacional? O que haverá de peculiar nesta instância de realização do Direito que explique a autonomização da matéria da prova tal quando realizada em arbitragem comercial internacional? Não será a teoria geral da prova aplicável à demonstração da realidade num certo tipo de processos – os processos arbitrais – sempre que estes respeitem a litígios comerciais e plurilocalizados?
Estas as questões centrais, em torno das quais gravitará o texto. Acentuaremos aquele que julgamos ser o factor determinante no desenvolvimento de uma praxis que, não provocando uma ruptura entre a teoria geral da prova, desenvolvida para os processos civis julgados em tribunais estaduais, e os vectores centrais da prova, tal como conhecidos na arbitragem comercial internacional: o contexto do exercício da jurisdição.O que pode justificar a publicação de um texto sobre a prova na arbitragem comercial internacional? O que haverá de peculiar nesta instância de realização do Direito que explique a autonomização da matéria da prova tal quando realizada em arbitragem comercial internacional? Não será a teoria geral da prova aplicável à demonstração da realidade num certo tipo de processos – os processos arbitrais – sempre que estes respeitem a litígios comerciais e plurilocalizados?
Estas as questões centrais, em torno das quais gravitará o texto. Acentuaremos aquele que julgamos ser o factor determinante no desenvolvimento de uma praxis que, não provocando uma ruptura entre a teoria geral da prova, desenvolvida para os processos civis julgados em tribunais estaduais, e os vectores centrais da prova, tal como conhecidos na arbitragem comercial internacional: o contexto do exercício da jurisdição
Understanding Epistemic Injustice as Contributory Injustice: A Comment on Picinali's Argument
Get PDFThis paper offers some further support to Federico Picinali’s argument, in «Evidential Reasoning, Testimonial Injustice and the Fairness of the Criminal Trial», that a trial is unfair when assessments of relevance and probative value includes an epistemic injustice, namely a testimonial injustice. It has been argued that there are barriers to establishing testimonial injustice in specific cases, such as the ones Picinali surveys. This paper argues that even if we accept that there are concerns about establishing the occurrence of a testimonial injustice in the cases Picinali identifies, we can reformulate the epistemic injustice that renders the trial unfair as a contributory injustice. Reformulating the epistemic injustice as a contributory injustice evades the concerns we might have with establishing testimonial injustice allowing Picinali’s broad argument that a trial is unfair when an assessment of evidence includes an epistemic injustice—contributory or testimonial—to remain intact. This reformulation also offers new propositions on how to combat epistemic injustice
A manera de introducción de la sección a propósito del contenido de los informes periciales
Get PDFIntroducción de los artículos de la sección "Ciencia para el proceso"Introduction to the articles of the "Science for legal proceedings" sectionIntroducción de los artículos de la sección "Ciencia para el proceso"Introducción de los artículos de la sección "Ciencia para el proceso
Assessment of Evidence in Arbitration
Get PDFLa valoración de la prueba en el arbitraje, pese a que puede sostenerse que no tiene estándares con carácter definido, pues en la mayoría de los casos se atribuye al tribunal arbitral la potestad de su evaluación, no obstante en las prácticas comerciales se tienen en cuenta algunas pautas que resultan clásicas dentro de los sistemas tradicionales en el mundo occidental, como son el common law y el civil law, razón por la cual si bien se han señalado algunos de esos parámetros, se ha hecho especial referencia en esta tarea a nuestras pautas culturales y nuestra formación dentro del sistema continental, que si bien conceden al tribunal arbitral la facultad de acceder por vía de su libre convicción sobre la verdad construida en el proceso, ese método debe ser racional y controlable, circunstancias que asimilan el procedimiento a las reglas de la sana crítica.The evaluation of evidence in arbitration, despite it can be argued that it does not have definite standards of proof, since in most cases the arbitral tribunal is given the power to evaluate it, nevertheless in commercial practice some guidelines, that are classic within the traditional systems in the Western world, are taken into account, such as common law and civil law, for this reason, although some of these parameters have been pointed out, special reference has been made in this task to our cultural guidelines and our formation within the continental system, which, although they concede the arbitral tribunal the power to access by way of its inner conviction on the truth constructed in the process, this method must be rational and controllable, circumstances that assimilate the procedure to the rules of sound criticism
Judging Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt: A Logic and Epistemological Rule
Get PDFThe doubt is not related to innocence but only to guilt, the latter being the exclusive object of the process. The proof of guilt, being always of inductive nature, cannot accept the deductive method that connotes the relationship between premise (minor and major) and conclusion. From here arises the necessity that beyond reasonable doubt must respond to the postulates of logic and the motivation of judgments is an example. Research tends to show whether there is a valid theory to overcome the doubt of uncertainty about guilt-innocence. Can jurisprudence (mathematics-legal) as an exact science aid in the discovery of a perfect syllogism for a valid theory of reasonable doubt
El informe pericial químico en la determinación de residuales de disparos: Contenidos mínimos, razonamiento experto y debido proceso
Get PDFThis article aims to analyze an expert report produced by the legal chemistry area in the determination of gunshot residue. The purpose is to determine if it has the necessary information to evaluate the quality of the expert knowledge, considering the demands of due process. To achieve this purpose, first of all, the content of the report will be described in relation to procedural regulations and expert practice, focusing on its formal aspects. In the second part, emphasis will be placed on the substantial aspects, highlighting the content of the specialized knowledge present in the expert report, and evaluating the quality of the expert knowledge in the particular case, trying to understand the logic underlying the expert reasoning. Finally, in the third part, reflections and recommendations for improvement will be presented, related to the previous points, with the purpose of contributing to the quality of specialized knowledge, which is essential to guarantee an adequate legal process.Este artículo tiene como objetivo analizar un informe pericial producido por el área de química legal en la determinación de residuos de disparo. La finalidad es examinar si el mismo cuenta con la información necesaria para evaluar la calidad del conocimiento experto, considerando las exigencias del debido proceso. Para alcanzar este propósito, en primer lugar, se describirá el contenido del informe en relación con la normativa procesal y la práctica pericial, con un enfoque en los aspectos formales del mismo. En la segunda parte, se hará hincapié en los aspectos sustanciales, resaltando el contenido del conocimiento especializado y evaluando la calidad del conocimiento experto en el caso particular, tratando de comprender la lógica subyacente en el razonamiento pericial. Finalmente, en la tercera parte, se presentarán reflexiones y recomendaciones de mejora, relacionadas con los puntos anteriores, con el propósito de contribuir a la calidad del conocimiento especializado, esencial para garantizar un proceso legal adecuado.Este artículo tiene como objetivo analizar un informe pericial producido por el área de química legal en la determinación de residuos de disparo. La finalidad es examinar si el mismo cuenta con la información necesaria para evaluar la calidad del conocimiento experto, considerando las exigencias del debido proceso. Para alcanzar este propósito, en primer lugar, se describirá el contenido del informe en relación con la normativa procesal y la práctica pericial, con un enfoque en los aspectos formales del mismo. En la segunda parte, se hará hincapié en los aspectos sustanciales, resaltando el contenido del conocimiento especializado y evaluando la calidad del conocimiento experto en el caso particular, tratando de comprender la lógica subyacente en el razonamiento pericial. Finalmente, en la tercera parte, se presentarán reflexiones y recomendaciones de mejora, relacionadas con los puntos anteriores, con el propósito de contribuir a la calidad del conocimiento especializado, esencial para garantizar un proceso legal adecuado.Este artículo tiene como objetivo analizar un informe pericial producido por el área de química legal en la determinación de residuos de disparo. La finalidad es examinar si el mismo cuenta con la información necesaria para evaluar la calidad del conocimiento experto, considerando las exigencias del debido proceso. Para alcanzar este propósito, en primer lugar, se describirá el contenido del informe en relación con la normativa procesal y la práctica pericial, con un enfoque en los aspectos formales del mismo. En la segunda parte, se hará hincapié en los aspectos sustanciales, resaltando el contenido del conocimiento especializado y evaluando la calidad del conocimiento experto en el caso particular, tratando de comprender la lógica subyacente en el razonamiento pericial. Finalmente, en la tercera parte, se presentarán reflexiones y recomendaciones de mejora, relacionadas con los puntos anteriores, con el propósito de contribuir a la calidad del conocimiento especializado, esencial para garantizar un proceso legal adecuado
Raciocínio indutivo no direito tributário: Inferência e suficiência probatória
Get PDFThis article aims to analyze inductive reasoning and its application to resolve factual issues in tax matters. To this end, three types of induction are presented (generalization, causal and analogical), as well as their uses (in Tax Law and outside of it) and their strength (including their limitations). The article concludes that the quality of the evidentiary judgment is influenced by two variables. On the one hand, by meeting the criteria regarding the formation and evaluation of evidence that serve as a basis for the sentence, such as the magnitude, variety and representativeness of the evidence. On the other hand, by the standard of proof applicable to the case: the stricter the degree of sufficiency required for certain hypotheses to be considered proven, the stronger must be the proof and the degree of inferential security.Este artigo tem o objetivo de analisar o raciocínio indutivo e a sua aplicação para a resolução de questões fáticas em matéria tributária. Para tanto são apresentadas três espécies de indução (generalizadora, causal e analógica), examinados os seus usos (no Direito Tributário e fora dele) e a sua força (inclusive as suas limitações). O artigo conclui que a qualidade do raciocínio probatório é influenciada por duas variáveis. De um lado, pela observância a critérios relativos à formação e avaliação dos elementos probatórios que servem de base à premissa fática da sentença, tais como a grandeza, variedade e representatividade dos elementos de prova. De outro, pelo standard de prova aplicável ao caso: quanto mais rigoroso for o grau de suficiência exigido para que determinada hipótese probatória seja considerada provada, mais forte deve ser o grau de segurança inferencial.Este artigo tem o objetivo de analisar o raciocínio indutivo e a sua aplicação para a resolução de questões fáticas em matéria tributária. Para tanto são apresentadas três espécies de indução (generalizadora, causal e analógica), examinados os seus usos (no Direito Tributário e fora dele) e a sua força (inclusive as suas limitações). O artigo conclui que a qualidade do raciocínio probatório é influenciada por duas variáveis. De um lado, pela observância a critérios relativos à formação e avaliação dos elementos probatórios que servem de base à premissa fática da sentença, tais como a grandeza, variedade e representatividade dos elementos de prova. De outro, pelo standard de prova aplicável ao caso: quanto mais rigoroso for o grau de suficiência exigido para que determinada hipótese probatória seja considerada provada, mais forte deve ser o grau de segurança inferencial.Este artigo tem o objetivo de analisar o raciocínio indutivo e a sua aplicação para a resolução de questões fáticas em matéria tributária. Para tanto são apresentadas três espécies de indução (generalizadora, causal e analógica), examinados os seus usos (no Direito Tributário e fora dele) e a sua força (inclusive as suas limitações). O artigo conclui que a qualidade do raciocínio probatório é influenciada por duas variáveis. De um lado, pela observância a critérios relativos à formação e avaliação dos elementos probatórios que servem de base à premissa fática da sentença, tais como a grandeza, variedade e representatividade dos elementos de prova. De outro, pelo standard de prova aplicável ao caso: quanto mais rigoroso for o grau de suficiência exigido para que determinada hipótese probatória seja considerada provada, mais forte deve ser o grau de segurança inferencial
Falsas creencias sobre la memoria de los testigos en profesionales y estudiantes de ciencias sociales y jurídicas
Get PDFPolice officers with and without experience, trainee judges at the Judicial School, and undergraduate students in Psychology, Law, and Criminology were assessed on some of the main topics regarding the psychology of testimony. The results showed an average percentage of correct answers close to chance, with few differences between the various evaluated groups. The findings indicate that false beliefs about the functioning of witness memory are common, factors influencing the accuracy of statements and identifications are unknown, and there is limited understanding of the testimony capacity of child and elderly witnesses. It is concluded that many beliefs about witness memory are false. A mixed training in Psychology, Law, and Police Sciences could promote a better understanding of witness memory functioning, allowing for the minimization of errors in testimony assessment.Se evaluó a policías con y sin experiencia, jueces en formación en la Escuela Judicial y estudiantes del Grado de Psicología, Derecho y Criminología sobre algunos de los principales tópicos acerca de la psicología del testimonio. Los resultados mostraron un porcentaje medio de aciertos globales cercano al azar, con escasas diferencias entre los distintos colectivos evaluados. Los resultados muestran que son frecuentes las falsas creencias sobre el funcionamiento de la memoria de los testigos, se desconocen los factores que influyen en la exactitud de las declaraciones e identificaciones y la capacidad para testificar de testigos infantiles y de avanzada edad. Se concluye que muchas de las creencias sobre la memoria de los testigos son falsas. Una formación mixta en psicología, derecho y ciencias policiales podría favorecer un mejor conocimiento sobre el funcionamiento de la memoria de los testigos que permita minimizar los errores en la valoración de los testimonios
A Critical Perspective on Testimonial Injustice: Interrogating Witnesses' Credibility Excess in Criminal Trials: A Comment on Federico Picinali's "Evidential Reasoning, Testimonial Injustice and the Fairness of the Criminal Trial"
Get PDFThis paper offers a critical race theory perspective on the testimonial injustice experienced by racially minoritized criminal defendants in evidential practice. It builds off Federico Picinali’s paper, inter alia, substantiating how minoritized criminal defendants experience testimonial harm through credibility deficit, by exploring epistemic injustice to the same when prosecutorial witnesses receive identity-based credibility excess. It argues that in an adversarial criminal legal system, the testimonial injustice of credibility excess afforded racial in-group prosecutorial witnesses should be considered in tandem with the testimonial injustice of credibility deficit imposed on racial out-group defendants. Only then can the epistemic harm and resultant unfairness at trial for defendants be fully assessed. The paper advocates for expanding the definition of testimonial injustice to encompass the epistemic wrong of socially biased credibility excess and “transferred epistemic harm.” In instances of transferred epistemic harm, the harm inflicted by an epistemic wrong impacts the speaker’s interlocutor rather (or more) than the speaker themselves