Subjective Threats to the Free Evaluation of Evidence: Toward a More Coherent Legal Regulation

Abstract

In the fourth chapter (“Subjective Threats to the Free Evaluation of Evidence: Toward a More Coherent Legal Regulation”), the ability of coherence to ensure the predictability of legal decisions made by the courts is considered. A rational judge should seek coherence, consistency and internal compatibility in their decisions. Studies conducted by psychologists and other specialists show that, in reality, judges use not only accurate, rational and logical decision-making methods when dealing with cases, but also intuitive approaches. Incoherence (through the prism of predictability) is a possible (or perhaps inevitable) product of such a decision-making process. Attention is drawn to the fact that it is important to seek coherence between human nature and legal regulation, i.e., to accept human imperfections and try to account for those by applying certain procedures or creating appropriate constructs. In addition, it is emphasized that the formation of certain general models of legal regulation which help to ensure coherence in the evidence evaluation process is an institutional task.