Discussion paper: Hard cases make bad lawreactions to R v T

ISSN： 1470-8396

Source： Law, Probability and Risk, Vol.11, Iss.4, 2012-12, pp. : 347-359

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Related content

Discussion paper: The R v T controversy: forensic evidence, law and logic

By Hamer David

Law, Probability and Risk, Vol. 11, Iss. 4, 2012-12 ,pp. : 331-345

Oxford University Press

Access to resources Recommend Favorite

How to assign a likelihood ratio in a footwear mark case: an analysis and discussion in the light of R v T

By Biedermann A. Taroni F. Champod C.

Law, Probability and Risk, Vol. 11, Iss. 4, 2012-12 ,pp. : 259-277

Oxford University Press

Access to resources Recommend Favorite

Some Realism for Hard Cases

By Núñez Vaquero Aacute lvaro

The Theory and Practice of Legislation, Vol. 1, Iss. 1, 2013-06 ,pp. : 149-171

Hart Publishing

Access to resources Recommend Favorite

Reply to Hamer: The R v T controversy: forensic evidence, law and logic

By Biedermann A. Taroni F. Champod C.

Law, Probability and Risk, Vol. 11, Iss. 4, 2012-12 ,pp. : 361-362

Oxford University Press

Access to resources Recommend Favorite

Discussion paper: A just measure of probability

By Ligertwood Andrew Edmond Gary

Law, Probability and Risk, Vol. 11, Iss. 4, 2012-12 ,pp. : 365-369

Oxford University Press

Access to resources Recommend Favorite