Question

In racial prerequisite cases, how does judges' reliance on scientific evidence versus common knowledge change over time?

Answer 1

Most decisions are based on clear evidence of how it brought to the judge. In cases where judgment is based on the judge's common knowledge, he is obliged to make a 'juristic' decision under the laws and way of life that prevails at that time. Even if the general wisdom is incorrect, there are several exceptions to acts taken by a few against society that are not incorrect with this assessment. In such a circumstance, one wouldn't expect a judge to have the ability to explore the point of view of the accuser or the accused, and that's what helps maintain the sense of equality and fairness when deciding these cases. But we can observe, analyze and understand information as soon as judgment is based on scientific knowledge, which is a scientific understanding. Science has become much more important due to years of court decisions requiring science to be put before a judge in the process of evidence the investigation in court and expert witnesses in the process of collecting scientific evidence. Legal profession members have been aware that a judge must require scientific evidence before giving a scientific study-based verdict. Earlier, judges only used religious doctrine to judge a case. Scientific awareness has influenced how a court would consider a matter in the 21st century. Judges are free to take decisions according to the best scientific understanding available, while upholding a democratic principle of evidence-based decision-making. In influencing the decision-making process, science will make decisions more accurate and therefore fairer.