Can a judge rely on his private knowledge? Early modern Lutherans and Catholics compared

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

Can a judge rely on his private knowledge? Early modern Lutherans and Catholics compared. / Astorri, Paolo.

In: Comparative Legal History, Vol. 9, No. 1, 04.2021, p. 56-88.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Astorri, P 2021, 'Can a judge rely on his private knowledge? Early modern Lutherans and Catholics compared', Comparative Legal History, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 56-88. https://doi.org/10.1080/2049677X.2021.1908935

APA

Astorri, P. (2021). Can a judge rely on his private knowledge? Early modern Lutherans and Catholics compared. Comparative Legal History, 9(1), 56-88. https://doi.org/10.1080/2049677X.2021.1908935

Vancouver

Astorri P. Can a judge rely on his private knowledge? Early modern Lutherans and Catholics compared. Comparative Legal History. 2021 Apr;9(1):56-88. https://doi.org/10.1080/2049677X.2021.1908935

Author

Astorri, Paolo. / Can a judge rely on his private knowledge? Early modern Lutherans and Catholics compared. In: Comparative Legal History. 2021 ; Vol. 9, No. 1. pp. 56-88.

Bibtex

@article{8c7b512b6c7743f7913d06cb062a7cc1,
title = "Can a judge rely on his private knowledge? Early modern Lutherans and Catholics compared",
abstract = "This article examines the opinions of Catholic and Lutheran authors on the question of whether a judge should decide a case according to his personal knowledge when that knowledge conflicts with the charges and evidence at the trial. The majority of the Catholics contended that the judge had to follow the evidence. They distinguished between the judge as a public functionary and as a private man. The judge could not use in a trial what he knew as a man. There were certain Lutherans whose opinions remained close to this position. However, a significant number argued that the distinction between the judge as a functionary and as a man lacked foundation. Divine law commanded the judge to avoid lies and not to kill an innocent. If the judge knew that someone was innocent and nonetheless condemned him by following the evidence at the trial, he committed a sin. To avoid giving an unjust sentence, the judge had to use the knowledge he had obtained privately.",
author = "Paolo Astorri",
year = "2021",
month = apr,
doi = "10.1080/2049677X.2021.1908935",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "56--88",
journal = "Comparative Legal History",
issn = "2049-677X",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Can a judge rely on his private knowledge? Early modern Lutherans and Catholics compared

AU - Astorri, Paolo

PY - 2021/4

Y1 - 2021/4

N2 - This article examines the opinions of Catholic and Lutheran authors on the question of whether a judge should decide a case according to his personal knowledge when that knowledge conflicts with the charges and evidence at the trial. The majority of the Catholics contended that the judge had to follow the evidence. They distinguished between the judge as a public functionary and as a private man. The judge could not use in a trial what he knew as a man. There were certain Lutherans whose opinions remained close to this position. However, a significant number argued that the distinction between the judge as a functionary and as a man lacked foundation. Divine law commanded the judge to avoid lies and not to kill an innocent. If the judge knew that someone was innocent and nonetheless condemned him by following the evidence at the trial, he committed a sin. To avoid giving an unjust sentence, the judge had to use the knowledge he had obtained privately.

AB - This article examines the opinions of Catholic and Lutheran authors on the question of whether a judge should decide a case according to his personal knowledge when that knowledge conflicts with the charges and evidence at the trial. The majority of the Catholics contended that the judge had to follow the evidence. They distinguished between the judge as a public functionary and as a private man. The judge could not use in a trial what he knew as a man. There were certain Lutherans whose opinions remained close to this position. However, a significant number argued that the distinction between the judge as a functionary and as a man lacked foundation. Divine law commanded the judge to avoid lies and not to kill an innocent. If the judge knew that someone was innocent and nonetheless condemned him by following the evidence at the trial, he committed a sin. To avoid giving an unjust sentence, the judge had to use the knowledge he had obtained privately.

U2 - 10.1080/2049677X.2021.1908935

DO - 10.1080/2049677X.2021.1908935

M3 - Journal article

VL - 9

SP - 56

EP - 88

JO - Comparative Legal History

JF - Comparative Legal History

SN - 2049-677X

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 275830969