Judicial fact finding: trial by judge alone in serious criminal cases
Files
(Published version)
Date
2003
Authors
Waye, Vicki C.
Editors
Advisors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Type:
Journal article
Citation
Melbourne University Law Review, 2003; 27(2):423-457
Statement of Responsibility
Vicki Waye
Conference Name
Abstract
The ability to choose between trial by jury and trial by judge alone in some jurisdictions presupposes a rational basis for exercising the choice. In this article, the author examines judicial factfinding modalities from comparative and systemic perspectives. The conclusion drawn is that both judicial fact-finders and lay fact-finders process their decision-making similarly. In both instances, fact-finding involves the assimilation of disparate and sometimes complex information. In each case, the drawing of inferences is, of necessity, dependent upon heuristic reasoning. Furthermore, the application of principles of law to proven facts is inexact. However, there are a number of inbuilt safeguards in judicial fact-finding that promote rationality and inhibit cognitive illusion.
School/Discipline
Law School
Dissertation Note
Provenance
Description
Access Status
Rights
Copyright (c) 2003 Melbourne University Law Review Association, Inc.