It is important to think of the law of evidence as part of a temporal process ("evidentiary processes associated with litigation"), and not just as a body of rules that regulate the admissibility of evidence at trial and a few other questions that arise at trial. Litigators, of course, know that the law of evidence is part of a temporal process. Many law teachers have also acknowledged or affirmed that the law of evidence is part of a process. However, most courses in the law of evidence still treat the law of evidence mainly as a body of rules about the admissibility of evidence and about the standards the trier of fact should use to evaluate the evidence that is presented to it at trial. Of course, bar exams, which view the law of evidence in traditional academic terms, make it hard for teachers of the law of evidence to adopt a radically different perspective: Law students rightly expect to learn the legal rules they need to know to pass the bar exam.It is also important to view the law of evidence from the perspective of epistemology. But that's another (important) matter.
It is also important to view the law of evidence from the perspective of social values. But that is, again, another (important) matter.
It's here: the law of evidence on Spindle Law. See also this post and this post.
No comments:
Post a Comment