Epistemic Injustice in the Criminal Trial

Jasmine Gonzales Rose, Rachel Herdy, Tareeq Jalloh and Abenaa Owusu-Bempah have each written a paper commenting on my essay ‘Evidential Reasoning, Testimonial Injustice and the Fairness of the Criminal Trial’, which appeared in Quaestio Facti in 2024. In this reply I engage with their insightful wo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Federico Picinali
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Marcial Pons 2025-01-01
Series:Quaestio Facti
Subjects:
Online Access:https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/view/23098
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Jasmine Gonzales Rose, Rachel Herdy, Tareeq Jalloh and Abenaa Owusu-Bempah have each written a paper commenting on my essay ‘Evidential Reasoning, Testimonial Injustice and the Fairness of the Criminal Trial’, which appeared in Quaestio Facti in 2024. In this reply I engage with their insightful works. I discuss the advantages of framing in terms of ‘contributory injustice’ the scenarios analysed in my original essay. I briefly study the conditions for the existence of a correlation between credibility excess and credibility deficit. And I provide the sketch of a theory of trial fairness, which I am currently developing elsewhere.
ISSN:2660-4515
2604-6202