Some arguments about legal arguments

McCarty, L. Thorne

doi:10.1145/261618.261656

Cited by 31 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…also [27]'s legal-theoretic and [21]'s AI & Law take on theory construction). The path of justification is from evidence via facts to legal consequences (visualised as the white upward arrows).…”

Section: From Evidence Via Facts To Legal Consequences (And Back)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…evaluative thinking of the professionals that actually perform the reasoning in a criminal case, in particular criminal investigators and judges ( [21], [33], [5]). At first view, legal reasoning -reasoning about the (legal) facts and legal consequences (the top part of Figure 1) -seems quite different from evidential reasoning (cf.…”

Section: From Evidence Via Facts To Legal Consequences (And Back)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A coherent story (cf. [21], [30]) is causally connected in that the individual events are connected by (sometimes implicit) causal links. This allows us to perform abductive reasoning in order to infer what happened to Kevin.…”

Section: Abductive Reasoning With Stories and Story Schemesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…plausible) to a "true" story (i.e. supported by strong evidence): [21] [33] show that in some cases, the incoherent story is actually better supported by the evidence.…”

Section: Definition 13 [Evidential Gaps]mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Legal stories and the process of proof

Bex

Verheij

2012

Artif Intell Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we continue our research on a hybrid narrative-argumentative approach to evidential reasoning in the law by showing the interaction between factual reasoning (providing a proof for 'what happened' in a case) and legal reasoning (making a decision based on the proof). First we extend the hybrid theory by making the connection with reasoning towards legal consequences. We then emphasise the role of legal stories (as opposed to the factual stories of the hybrid theory). Legal stories provide a coherent, holistic legal perspective on a case. They steer what needs to be proven but are also selected on the basis of what can be proven. We show how these legal stories can be used to model a shift of the legal perspective on a case, and we discuss how gaps in a legal story can be filled using a factual story (i.e. the process of reasoning with circumstantial evidence). Our model is illustrated by a discussion of the Dutch Wamel murder case.

show abstract

Section: From Evidence Via Facts To Legal Consequences (And Back)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: From Evidence Via Facts To Legal Consequences (And Back)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Abductive Reasoning With Stories and Story Schemesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…plausible) to a "true" story (i.e. supported by strong evidence): [21] [33] show that in some cases, the incoherent story is actually better supported by the evidence.…”

Section: Definition 13 [Evidential Gaps]mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Legal stories and the process of proof

Bex

Verheij

2012

Artif Intell Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, much of the related work on AI has focused on trying to identify "ideal" principles of responsibility (e.g. the legal code or philosophical principles) and ideal mechanisms to reason about these, typically contradictory principles (e.g., non-monotonic or case-based reasoning) [McCarty, 1997].…”

Section: Attribution Theory For Social Judgmentmentioning

confidence: 99%