Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
"When a judge hears enough testimony to be convinced that the device is scientifically reliable, he takes "judicial notice" of the device. From then on in that court, defendants can argue that the device was misapplied, misused, or misconstrued, but they can't argue that it doesn't work. Judicial notice was taken of radar years ago"
"If that higher court confirms the correctness of the trial court's verdict, that would establish judicial notice in all courts within that district"
In general, a party seeking to establish a case in court must offer evidence to support all relevant assertions. However, certain facts are sufficiently well established in courtroom practice that they don't need specific proof. For example, it does not have to be proved that if a driver had a breath-test for alchohol at the scene of a road accident, and the test was positive, that the driver had consumed too much alchohol to drive. In other words, there is a presumption that these devices measure accurately and that the measurements are universally applicable. Similar reasoning applies, for example, to speed measuring devices. In such a case the burden of proof would be on the accused to show that in that specific case the presumption could not be justified.
grazie a tutti! Conoscenza giudiziale è effettivamente la traduzione ufficiale, ma non l'ho usata perche' il mio articolo era a carattere divulgativo e non il termine italiano non era immediatamente chiaro a tutti. Oltre a questa perifrasi suggerita da Jan, ne ho usate altre (la parola si ripeteva una decina di volte) del tipo "convalidare l'uso di xxx come prova ammissibile in giudizio", ecc. 4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer