3044
To decide -justifiably-whether or not a given proposition proven on the facts of a case, it is necessary in a system of free assessment of evidence, to have a standard. This, in order to assess whether the available evidence, rationally valued, is sufficient to consider that proven. This threshold o...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo publishedVersion |
| Lenguaje: | Español |
| Publicado: |
Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Derecho. Departamento de Publicaciones
2014
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | http://www.derecho.uba.ar/publicaciones/pensar-en-derecho/revistas/4/la-prueba-es-suficiente-cuando-es-suficiente.pdf http://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=pensar&cl=CL1&d=HWA_3044 https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/collect/pensar/index/assoc/HWA_3044.dir/3044.PDF |
| Aporte de: |
| Sumario: | To decide -justifiably-whether or not a given proposition proven on the facts of a case, it is necessary in a system of free assessment of evidence, to have a standard. This, in order to assess whether the available evidence, rationally valued, is sufficient to consider that proven. This threshold of sufficiency can be fixed by law in various ways, for example, when the prosecution is founded by a conviction "beyond reasonable doubt". In this paper I present how the vagueness of the formulation of a standard unsurpassed generates a kind of tautology: is sufficient proof that which the court believes is sufficient. Stressing that the courts are required to base their decisions, unlike the common law system in which it is imposed in respect of juries. Working subliminally the theme of punishment from the perspective of the concept of "sufficiency" as built by the judicial decision decider: What is the "degree of belief" required for processing, oral arguments and appeals (Principle of immediacy and evaluation of evidence). |
|---|