Episodes

  • 165 Hayley Stillwell

    165 Hayley Stillwell
    Apr 7 2025
    Placebo Trials. Hayley Stillwell from the University of Oklahoma proposes the use of "placebo trials," test trials in which the alleged defendant is known to be innocent, to learn about jury dynamics and the empirical consequences of evidentiary rules.
    Show More Show Less
    Less than 1 minute
  • 164 Stephen Simon

    164 Stephen Simon
    Mar 24 2025
    Value Judgments and the Fact-Law Distinction. Stephen Simon from the University of Richmond offers a new perspective on the time-honored law-fact distinction.
    Show More Show Less
    Less than 1 minute
  • 163 Tomer Kenneth

    163 Tomer Kenneth
    Mar 10 2025
    In Defense of Factual Precedents. Tomer Kenneth from the University of Southern California discusses the evidentiary problem of general facts that are applicable across multiple cases, and whether there should be governed by doctrines akin to precedent.
    Show More Show Less
    Less than 1 minute
  • 162 Lisa Kern Griffin

    162 Lisa Kern Griffin
    Feb 24 2025
    The Limits and Costs of Cross-Examination. Lisa Kern Griffin from Duke University considers the costs of our excessive devotion to and dependence on cross-examination as our chief mechanism for ensuring accuracy in factfinding.
    Show More Show Less
    Less than 1 minute
  • 161 Ronald Allen

    161 Ronald Allen
    Feb 10 2025
    Minimal Rationality and the Law of Evidence. Ron Allen from Northwestern University argues that the goal of the law of evidence is to ensure minimal, not maximal, rationality in our adjudicative processes.
    Show More Show Less
    Less than 1 minute
  • 160 Trace Maddox

    160 Trace Maddox
    Jan 27 2025
    The Lawyer, the Witch, and the Witness. Trace Maddox from NYU School of Law discusses the witchcraft trials in sixteenth to eighteenth-century England, and how contrary to popular belief, they largely adhered to standard procedural and evidentiary rules at the time. His historical findings thus raise interesting questions about the nature of a fair and just adjudicatory system.
    Show More Show Less
    Less than 1 minute
  • 159 Michael Risinger

    159 Michael Risinger
    Jan 13 2025
    The Surprising Story of Smith v. Rapid Transit. Michael Risinger from Seton Hall University recounts his historical research into the famous case of Smith v. Rapid Transit, the case which ultimately spawned the "Blue Bus" hypothetical on statistical proof.
    Show More Show Less
    Less than 1 minute
  • 158 David Caudill

    158 David Caudill
    Oct 28 2024
    Judges Should Be Discerning Consensus, Not Evaluating Scientific Expertise. Dave Caudill from Villanova critiques and improves upon Ed Cheng's proposal to have courts defer to expert consensus rather than screening expert evidence through Daubert. The episode features some guest concluding remarks from Ed Cheng.
    Show More Show Less
    Less than 1 minute