(3)
In some cases a party may indicate alternative overall versions of the
facts. A party may do this because each version makes out the party’s case.
Typically they do this when there are gaps in the evidence and they have to
infer from the facts in evidence how these gaps can be filled – and sometimes
there may be two or more plausible stories that fill the gaps. To illustrate,
assume that there are three versions, which we can call X, Y and Z. It may be
that Versions X and Y favour one party while Version Z favours the other
party.
The point to parties putting forward versions of the truth is to set up Step 2.
There the court works out the probability that a party has made out their case.
Having found this probability, the court moves on to Step 3. There the court
assesses whether this probability satisfies the standard of truth (in legal
terminology the standard of proof) required by law for the party to win their
case. This, of course, is the bottom line. If a plaintiff or prosecutor satisfies
this standard of proof they win their case.
 |
 |
 |