What does it mean to be "Plausible"?
(2024) In Quaestio Facti - International Journal of Evidential Legal Reasoning p.91-102- Abstract
- This article explores what «plausible» means in statements about legal evidence and shows that it is highly ambiguous. Twelve different meanings of «plausibility» are identified and distin-guished from each other by definitions. Contrary to what has been claimed by some evidence scholars (Allen and Pardo, 2019), the article shows that all uses of «plausibility» can be captured in terms of probability. The author also shows that the exposed ambiguity is deeply problematic for legal practice and legal scholarship. The fundamental principle of justice that «like cases should be treated alike» is endangered when the standard of proof is expressed in an ambiguous way, and the scientific testability of hypotheses about legal fact-finding is... (More)
- This article explores what «plausible» means in statements about legal evidence and shows that it is highly ambiguous. Twelve different meanings of «plausibility» are identified and distin-guished from each other by definitions. Contrary to what has been claimed by some evidence scholars (Allen and Pardo, 2019), the article shows that all uses of «plausibility» can be captured in terms of probability. The author also shows that the exposed ambiguity is deeply problematic for legal practice and legal scholarship. The fundamental principle of justice that «like cases should be treated alike» is endangered when the standard of proof is expressed in an ambiguous way, and the scientific testability of hypotheses about legal fact-finding is undermined when these hypotheses are formulated in ambiguous terms. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/8340dd3c-25a9-42d8-988e-342ae230b528
- author
- Dahlman, Christian LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2024
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Procedural law, Processrätt
- in
- Quaestio Facti - International Journal of Evidential Legal Reasoning
- issue
- 7
- pages
- 91 - 102
- publisher
- Marcial Pons
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85212249494
- ISSN
- 2604-6202
- DOI
- 10.33115/udg_bib/qf.i7.23030
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 8340dd3c-25a9-42d8-988e-342ae230b528
- date added to LUP
- 2024-07-02 11:05:00
- date last changed
- 2025-04-04 13:52:04
@article{8340dd3c-25a9-42d8-988e-342ae230b528,
abstract = {{This article explores what «plausible» means in statements about legal evidence and shows that it is highly ambiguous. Twelve different meanings of «plausibility» are identified and distin-guished from each other by definitions. Contrary to what has been claimed by some evidence scholars (Allen and Pardo, 2019), the article shows that all uses of «plausibility» can be captured in terms of probability. The author also shows that the exposed ambiguity is deeply problematic for legal practice and legal scholarship. The fundamental principle of justice that «like cases should be treated alike» is endangered when the standard of proof is expressed in an ambiguous way, and the scientific testability of hypotheses about legal fact-finding is undermined when these hypotheses are formulated in ambiguous terms.}},
author = {{Dahlman, Christian}},
issn = {{2604-6202}},
keywords = {{Procedural law; Processrätt}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{7}},
pages = {{91--102}},
publisher = {{Marcial Pons}},
series = {{Quaestio Facti - International Journal of Evidential Legal Reasoning}},
title = {{What does it mean to be "Plausible"?}},
url = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/190369771/Dahlman_What_does_it_mean_to_be_plausible_QF_2024_elektroniskt_s_rtryck_.pdf}},
doi = {{10.33115/udg_bib/qf.i7.23030}},
year = {{2024}},
}