Standards and Methods of Proof
In an erudite and wide-ranging contribution to this Revista, Jacopo Della Torre leverages the analytical power of comparative legal history to illuminate contemporary debates surrounding the standard of proof for criminal convictions. At the invitation of the Editors, I am pleased to have this oppo...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Universitat de Girona. Cátedra de Cultura Jurídica
2025-06-01
|
| Series: | Quaestio Facti |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/view/23151 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | In an erudite and wide-ranging contribution to this Revista, Jacopo Della Torre leverages the analytical power of comparative legal history to illuminate contemporary debates surrounding the standard of proof for criminal convictions. At the invitation of the Editors, I am pleased to have this opportunity to comment on Della Torre’s thought-provoking article.1 The following remarks are of two broad kinds. The first section of this Comment addresses methodological issues in comparative legal scholarship, largely expressing agreement with Della Torre’s general approach, but with a few caveats and clarifications for further consideration. In the second section, I turn to practical questions of procedural jurisprudence and institutional practice in criminal adjudication. With the disciplinary agenda and biases of an English lawyer, my thoughts on these issues will embroider upon, and diverge somewhat, from Della Torre’s exposition. I will also suggest some minor exegetical corrections and refinements.
|
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2660-4515 2604-6202 |