Popular in Evidence & Legal Reasoning
Popular in Department
This 2 page Class Notes was uploaded by Hannah Notetaker on Saturday July 30, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to POLI 3380 at Auburn University taught by Dr. Clifton Perry in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 75 views.
Reviews for Evidence 8/16
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 07/30/16
08/16/16 History of Evidence Rules came from common law and were established by the Supreme Court until in the mid 1970’s Congress altered them Truth In the politics of America, truth is run by combat because we have an adversarial system in which the judge and the jury decide what is “true" Judge and jury use reasoning to decide which side presented the “more true” side of the facts regardless of which side is phenomenologically true — meaning which is the absolute truth, not the assumed truth Reasoning Inductive: when two facts do not go hand in hand you know a fact is inductive if you can ﬁght it by showing a comparison like the ones below ex. if pregnant than a woman… but just by saying someone is a woman does not mean they have to be pregnant ex. an EEG reading being ﬂat on a 26 year old means they are dead… but an EEG reading being ﬂat on a 6 week old embryo does not mean they are dead Deductive: when two facts can easily be switched back and forth truth preserving and allows conclusions to be drawn based on what you provide in the facts allows for assumptions to be drawn ex. if A equals B and B equals C then… you assume A also equals C to determine if a fact is inductive or deductive you can draw it out one step farther and see if the facts still allow you to make an assumption to the analogy real case examples: Cotton v. AE (2011) - case about principle and agent factors Copeland v. Homana - cannot sue principle if agent is unpresent S.E. lines Other topics covered examples of distinctions: owner v. thief - owner gets property owner v. defrauding - owner gets property owner v. thief v. innocent 3rd party - owner gets property owner v. defrauding v. innocent 3rd party - owner gets property equivalent statements using one fact: all ravens are black no ravens are not black these two statements use the same fact but are worded diﬀerently and therefore the fact can be explained in a multitude of ways
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'