3 ms·
It's not the judge's role to independently nominate D. But that is exactly why the judge can not assume all possibilities were enumerated, and requires positiv
by Anderkent 14y ago
It's not the judge's role to independently nominate D.
But that is exactly why the judge can not assume all possibilities were enumerated, and requires positive evidence for C, rather than negative evidence for A and B.
- jacques_chester 14y agoJudges, oddly enough, decide cases according to the rules of legal reasoning. They cannot and won't introduce their own evidence. A judge that did so would be rightly removed from the bench.
- Anderkent 14y agoSo you agree then? I did not say a judge should propose any evidence. Perhaps it's easiest to explain with an example. Let's say the defence argues for A, and prosecution argues for B. The prosecution shows that the probability of A being true is 1%. The judge can not take that as a B having a probability of 99%, since it may be that C is true. Thus the judge requires prosecution to show that B is 50%+ likely, not that A is unlikely. Does that make more sense?