Christos Strubakos,
Assistant Professor of Law,
University of Detroit Mercy School of Law
Abstract: In law, evidence is any information (including testimony, documents, and tangible objects) presented to prove or disprove a disputed fact. This talk will show how the U.S. Federal Rules of Evidence treat legal evidence as existing on an epistemic continuum rather than being binary, or certain. For example, FRE 401 considers evidence relevant if it has “any tendency” to make a fact more or less probable. FRE 403 balances probative value against prejudice, noting probative value exists on a spectrum. Other rules consider evidence’s “trustworthiness” by using different modifiers on the word “trustworthiness.” Yet, the rules provide surprisingly little guidance about how these judgments should be made. Thus, legal fact finders must evaluate evidence on a sliding epistemic scale. Interestingly, appellate courts review lower-court determinations on the admissibility of evidence for “abuse of discretion.” In other words, lower courts have broad discretion to determine where on the epistemic continuum evidence falls when deciding whether it ought to be admitted. This talk explores what that discretion reveals about evidentiary judgment, and what kind of reasoning allows a human decision-maker to apply their discretion and locate a piece of legal evidence on the epistemic continuum.
October 2, 2026
3:00 p.m. - 4:40 p.m.
Windsor Law School
(Faculty Lounge, Room 2200)
All Welcome