{"title":"对《刑事审判的认识论野心》评论的答复:真理、证据与权利","authors":"Sarah Jane Summers","doi":"10.33115/udg_bib/qf.i6.22992","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article sets out to reply to the comments by Antony Duff, Sabine Gless, John Jackson and Thomas Weigend on my article «Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial». It begins by examining the various positions of the commentators to the question of the aim(s) of the criminal trial before going on to consider the limits of instrumentalist and proceduralist approaches and to re-examine the right-based conception of trials. It concludes by considering the implications of this account of criminal trials.","PeriodicalId":252725,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio facti. Revista internacional sobre razonamiento probatorio","volume":"116 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reply to the Comments on Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial: Truth, Proof and Rights\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Jane Summers\",\"doi\":\"10.33115/udg_bib/qf.i6.22992\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article sets out to reply to the comments by Antony Duff, Sabine Gless, John Jackson and Thomas Weigend on my article «Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial». It begins by examining the various positions of the commentators to the question of the aim(s) of the criminal trial before going on to consider the limits of instrumentalist and proceduralist approaches and to re-examine the right-based conception of trials. It concludes by considering the implications of this account of criminal trials.\",\"PeriodicalId\":252725,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quaestio facti. Revista internacional sobre razonamiento probatorio\",\"volume\":\"116 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quaestio facti. Revista internacional sobre razonamiento probatorio\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33115/udg_bib/qf.i6.22992\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quaestio facti. Revista internacional sobre razonamiento probatorio","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33115/udg_bib/qf.i6.22992","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reply to the Comments on Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial: Truth, Proof and Rights
This article sets out to reply to the comments by Antony Duff, Sabine Gless, John Jackson and Thomas Weigend on my article «Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial». It begins by examining the various positions of the commentators to the question of the aim(s) of the criminal trial before going on to consider the limits of instrumentalist and proceduralist approaches and to re-examine the right-based conception of trials. It concludes by considering the implications of this account of criminal trials.