Addressing Contradictions in Evidence: the Duty of the Court

Abstract

This article examines the complexities surrounding the court’s assessment of evidence, particularly concerning contradictions encountered during the adjudication of criminal cases. It emphasizes that the resolution of such contractions is an essential aspect of a judge’s procedural duties. Mere logical coherence in the court’s conclusions is insufficient to validate a verdict; instead, all significant contradictions within the case materials must be meticulously identified and rectified through objective scrutiny and evaluation of the evidence. Additionally, the author highlights the court’s obligation to justify, in cases where irreducible doubts persist regarding the defendant’s guilt, the inability to eliminate such doubts in the verdict.