Is Law A Science ?

In a recent article The Science Of Law I asserted that law, or more properly jurisprudence, is a science.  The basis for that assertion was that both science and law are founded in the Baconian method.

In this comment, A Bear In The Woods, said in rebuttal:

Phone Hacking Scandal - Appeal Dismissed

Rebekah Brooks, News International’s former chief executive,  Andy Coulson, former No. 10 spin doctor (Downing Street communications chief), and others have lost an appeal which attempted to redefine what is meant by the ordinary words which define  the unlawful interception of communications.

They, or rather their lawyers, tried to persuade the Appeal Court that the legal and technical definitions concerning the transmission of telecommunications did not cover voicemails.

The Science of Law

  Scattered throughout the pages of the history of the common law are many references to it being a science.  Science may be called the pursuit of fact by means of well-defined procedures.  Anyone who has ever visited any two courts of common law jurisprudence will have seen at first hand that their procedures inevitably differ somewhat.  The greatest difference will be found between English and American criminal courts.  Whereas in America the trial proper begins when the prosecutor addresses the jury, followed by the defence, in English Crown Courts the defence is not allowed to address the jury until all evidence has been shown or heard.

Laws and Flaws

The roots of miscarriages of justice.

  Although this article is about the common law, the author hopes that it may be of more than passing interest to scientists and to all seekers after truth.

  Over the course of some twenty years the author has used his skills in logic, science and literature research to carry out an in-depth study of the history of English law and of the causes of miscarriages of justice.  The main focus has been on English case law, but many cases from other common law jurisdictions have also been studied.