The Science of Judicial Proof, as Given by Logic, Psychology, and General Experience, and Illustrated in Judicial Trials¶
Wigmore, J. H. (1937). The Science of Judicial Proof, as Given by Logic, Psychology, and General Experience, and Illustrated in Judicial Trials.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Consistency
- Narrative and testimony. A witness account, a novel, or a film is internally consistent when its facts and timeline are jointly satisfiable, and detecting an inconsistency is the primary tool of cross-examination and of plot debugging.
This sourceFoundational treatment of detecting inconsistency in testimony as the basis of cross-examination.
- Narrative and testimony. A witness account, a novel, or a film is internally consistent when its facts and timeline are jointly satisfiable, and detecting an inconsistency is the primary tool of cross-examination and of plot debugging.
- Primary vs. Secondary Sources
- Wigmore's (1937) chart-method for analyzing judicial proof anticipates this failure mode: every inferential step in an argument must terminate at an item of primary evidence, and chains that loop only among secondary inferences are flagged as evidentially ungrounded.
This sourceDevelops the chart-method for analyzing argument structure: every inferential step must terminate at an item of primary evidence, and chains looping only among secondary inferences are flagged as evidentially ungrounded.
- Wigmore's (1937) chart-method for analyzing judicial proof anticipates this failure mode: every inferential step in an argument must terminate at an item of primary evidence, and chains that loop only among secondary inferences are flagged as evidentially ungrounded.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 2 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Links previously used in the corpus¶
Before the registry existed this work was also linked 1 other way.
Registry ID ref:83178cc3b219 · see in the full table