Los fundamentos probatorios del razonamiento probabilístico de David A. Schum

William Twining

doi:10.30827/acfs.v52i0.6558

Authors

William Twining University College London

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30827/acfs.v52i0.6558

Abstract

En reseña de:

Schum, David, Los fundamentos probatorios del razonamiento probabilístico, traducción y edición a cargo de Orión Vargas, Xpress Estudio Gráfico y Digital, 2016, 665 páginas.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anderson, T. y Twining, W. (1991). Analysis of Evidence. Boston: Little Brown.

Anderson, T. (2003). Wigmore Meets the Last Wedge. En Twining y HampsherMonk (eds.). Evidence and Inference in History and Law: Interdisciplinary Dialogues.

Anderson, T, D. Schum and Twining (2005). Analysis of Evidence. 2nd edn., Cambridge University Press.

Anderson, T. y Twining, W. (2014). Law and Archaeology: modified Wigmorean Analysis. En Robert Chapman and Alison Wylie (eds.) Material Evidence: Learning from Archaeological Practice, Ch.5. London: Routledger.

Anderson, T y. Twining (2015). Evidential Reasoning in the International Tribunal for Rwanda: A Case Study of Tharcisse Muvunyi. 26 Criminal Law Forum.

Bentham, J. (1810). An Introductory View of the Rationale of the Law of Evidence for Use by Non-lawyers as well as Lawyers (vi works 1-187. Bowring edition, 1837-43. Originally edited by James Mill circa 1810).

Cohen, L. J. (1977). The Probable and the Provable. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dawid, P., Twining, W. y Vasalaki, M. (eds.) (2011). Evidence, Inference and Enquiry. London: British Academy.

Frank, J. (1949). Courts on Trial. Princeton University Press.

Haack, S. (2007). Defending Science within Reason: between scientism and cynicism. NY: Prometheus Books.

Kadane, J. y Schum, D. (1966). Probabilistic Analysis of the Sacco and Vanzetti Evidence. New York: Wiley.

Roberts, P. y Redmayne (eds.) (2007). Innovations in evidence and proof: integrating theory, research and teaching. Oxford: Hart.

Roberts, P. y Aitken (2014). The Logic of Forensic Proof: Inferential Reasoning in Criminal Evidence and Forensic Science. London: Royal Statistical Society

Schum, D. (1987). Evidence and Inference for the Intelligence Analyst, 2 vols. Lanham, Md., University of America Press.

Schum, D. A. y Tillers, P. (1989). Marshalling Evidence throughout the Process of Fact-Investigation: A Simulation National Science Foundation. Report 89-04.

Schum, D. (1994). The Evidential Foundations of Probabilistic Reasoning. Wiley.

Schum, D. (1999a). Marshaling Thoughts and Evidence during Fact Investigation. South Texas Law Review, vol. 40, 401-454.

Schum, D. (1999b). Probabilistic Reasoning and the Science of Complexity. Shanteau, J., Mellors. B., Schum, D. (eds.). Decision Science and Technology. Kluwer Academic Press, 183-209.

Schum, D. (2000). Teaching about Discovery and Invention in Engineering. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Vol. 64, 209-223.

Schum, D. (2001a). Evidence Marshaling for Imaginative Fact Investigation. Artificial Intelligence and Law. Vol. 9, 165-188.

Schum, D. (2001b). Species of Abductive Reasoning in Fact Investigation in Law, Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 22, 1645-1681.

Schum, D. (2003). Evidence and inference about past events: an overview of six case studies. En W. Twining and I. Hampsher-Monk (eds.) Evidence and Inference in History and Law: Interdisciplinary Dialogues. Northwestern University Press, 9-62.

Twining, W. (ed.) (1983). Facts in Law. Wiesbaden.

Twining, W. (2006). Rethinking Evidence: Exploratory Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wigmore, J. H. (1913). Principles of Judicial Proof, as Given in Logic, Psychology and General Experience Boston: Little, Brown; (2nd edn., 1931; 3rd edn. Sub nom. Science of Judicial Proof).

Zangwill, I. (1895). The Big Bow Mystery. Chicago: Rand, McNally.