Justification and belief as the basis for proof in criminal trial

Abstract

The aim of the article is to present the role of justification and belief in the course of proving guilt in a criminal trial. The starting point is the indication of the inductive character of evidentiary reasoning and the acceptance of its conclusions on the basis of the decision making by trial authority. These decisions appear after the process in which this authority reaches the level of aspirations to make them; the second basis may be their expected usefulness. The requirements for proof are contrasted with the concept of knowledge. If one assumes that the attribution of knowledge to a particular subject consists in the possession of a justified, accurate belief by that subject, then one can assume that the possession of such knowledge is tantamount to proving in a trial sense. The tools supporting the pursuit of correctness of command are the Shafer-Dempster belief function and the Bayesian approach in making decisions about factual findings.