Review Article: Criminal Evidence and Analysis of Evidence—Laws Unto Themselves?, Criminal Evidence, Analysis of Evidence
| Published date | 01 July 2006 |
| DOI | 10.1350/ijep.10.4.327 |
| Date | 01 July 2006 |
| Subject Matter | Review Article |
REVIEW ARTICLE
NOTICEBOARD
REVIEW ARTICLE
Criminal Evidence and Analysis of
Evidence—laws unto themselves?
Paul Roberts and Adrian Zuckerman
Criminal Evidence
Oxford University Press (2004), 748pp, pb £29.99
Terence Anderson, David Schum and William Twining
Analysis Of Evidence, 2nd edn
Cambridge University Press (2005), 434pp, pb £27.99
Criminal Evidence by Roberts and Zuckerman (2004) and Analysis of Evidence by
Anderson, Schum and Twining (2005) approach the task of enhancing under-
standing of evidence divergently. Roberts and Zuckerman locate their exposition
and commentary on the law of criminal evidence in an analysis of legal doctrine,
criminal justice processes and procedural principles. The latter, they say, provide
‘the structural scaffolding and serve as moral touchstones for the many other,
more particularised principles of criminal evidence encountered’1in the text.
Roberts and Zuckerman boldly articulate the values underpinning the law of
criminal evidence as they trace the complex and at times confused way in which
these values have been pursued.
In contrast, Anderson, Schum and Twining’s Analysis of Evidence is not a text about
the Law of Evidence. It is a text about evidence with a small ‘e’. It is a book
primarily for law students in courses teaching trial practice and evidence where
the aim is to engage the student in the intellectual skills of inferential reasoning,
weighing evidence, constructing, challenging and evaluating arguments about
disputed facts. Analysis of Evidence aims to help the reader master these analytical
skills. Anderson, Schum and Twining claim that such proficiency will provide
generic skills transferable into many facets of legal and non-legal life. Its peda-
gogical focus and its unique contribution to writings on trial preparation make it
an excellent vehicle for law schools seeking to expand the context of the law of
evidence in their teaching programmes.
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE & PROOF (2006) 10 E&P 327–331 327
1Criminal Evidence, 18.
To continue reading
Request your trial