From the Editor... I have practiced a little bit of law -- I worked as a litigator, once in California and once in Texas -- but for most of my professional life I have studied and taught law.
In the early part of my academic career I dabbled in philosophy, particularly the philosophies of Kant and Hegel. But as I matured, I came to my senses. This explains why during the last 15 years I have devoted much more attention to evidence, inference, and proof in litigation than to German Idealism and similar matters. However, I did not succeed in completely obliterating the influence of philosophy and epistemology on my thinking. Thus, in my effort to understand and explain the process of proof in litigation, I have devoted a great deal of attention to matters such as probability theory and theories of evidence, inference, induction, and proof.
As might be expected, I intend to use the JURIST Evidence Guide to take note of interesting developments in the law of evidence. But, believing as I do that proof in litigation is a dynamic cognitive and decision making process -- AND that one should take advantage of the opportunities for experimentation that the internet offers-- , I also hope to use this subject guide to promote the
study and discussion of the dynamics of investigation and proof.