Warning
Info
Warning
Info
Simple English definitions for legal terms
pyramiding inferences, rule against
Read a random definition: arbitrary
A quick definition of pyramiding inferences, rule against:
Pyramiding inferences, rule against, is a legal rule that says a person cannot use one assumption to make another assumption to reach a conclusion. This means that a fact-finder cannot stack assumptions on top of each other to come to a decision. This rule is not followed in many places anymore, but some still use it. Another similar rule is the reasonable-inference rule.
A more thorough explanation:
Pyramiding inferences, rule against, is a legal principle that prohibits a fact-finder from making a conclusion based on a chain of inferences. This means that a fact-finder cannot pile one inference on top of another to arrive at a conclusion.
Although this rule was once followed in many jurisdictions, today it is only followed in a few.
For example, let's say that a witness testifies that they saw a person running away from a crime scene. The fact-finder cannot then infer that the person was the one who committed the crime based solely on this testimony. They must have additional evidence to support this conclusion.
Another example would be if a witness testifies that they saw a car speeding away from a bank robbery. The fact-finder cannot then infer that the driver of the car was the one who committed the robbery. They must have additional evidence to support this conclusion.
These examples illustrate the principle of pyramiding inferences, rule against, because they show that a fact-finder cannot make a conclusion based solely on one inference. They must have additional evidence to support their conclusion.