It is often said that the "doctrine of chances" -- think Brides in the Bath -- is good law, if only implicitly so. But my research reveals or suggests that during roughly the last 18 years only a small handful of federal courts -- perhaps only two -- have expressly endorsed the doctrine of chances. In view of this can it reasonably be argued that the doctrine of chances is good law in the federal system? I wonder. I seriously wonder.
Student of the law of evidence, evidence, inference, and investigation. Sometimes writes books. Sometimes writes articles. Sometimes tinkers with computer programs to support the marshaling of evidence for legal activities such as trials and pretrial discovery and investigation. And sometimes takes photographs.