Talk:Blank pad rule
 | This article follows the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Legal. It uses the Bluebook legal referencing style. This citation style uses standardized abbreviations, such as "N.Y. Times" for The New York Times. Please review those standards before making style or formatting changes. Information on this referencing style may be obtained at: Cornell's Basic Legal Citation site. |
 | A fact from Blank pad rule appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 November 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Tabula Rasa rule?
[edit]Shouldn't the proper Latin name for the rule - historically established and almost universally referred as such - be used for the article title? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.127.65.2 (talk) 17:09, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
- I had the same thought and am going to add a "See also" to Tabula rasa; I suspect "blank pad" is an American translation, I also see articles at Blank slate (disambiguation), but neither there nor at Tabula Rasa (disambiguation) a legal article, so I don't believe this has to be moved. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:00, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
- To answer your questions about the title of this article, reliable sources that discuss this doctrine call it the "blank pad rule" (see, e.g., this article at page 210.) The blank pad rule is closely related to both the philosophical concept of a tabula rasa and the confrontation clause, but the term "blank pad rule" has a distinct meaning in American legal jurisprudence. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 18:32, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
- I think my additions to See also and to DAB pages will help the reader unfamiliar with this translation of the Latin, but I also think the lede should make clear that this is a US legal term. Whether by adding "a United States ..." in the first sentence or by clarifying that it is the US term for a Common Law principle, I don't have the legal knowledge to determine. The article had already shown me that this is what it's called in US law. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:01, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
- Although I work in an American jurisdiction, my understanding is that the blank pad rule still exists in English law, and it may exist in other common law jurisdictions (see, e.g., this article at p.44 by Kenneth Graham, explaining the antecedents of the blank pad rule in the English common law tradition). Therefore, I think the most accurate description of the term would be to say that it is a doctrine in the common law tradition. Do you know of any English sources that refer to the doctrine by another name? Best, -- Notecardforfree (talk) 17:41, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
- I am not a lawyer :-) A quick search turned up this statement using the Latin phrase to refer to the concept, but I was unable to find a reference for the phrase that your source goes on to use, something like "independence of the evidence". I frankly don't know whether UK legal texts usually use tabula rasa or something else, but I'd be surprised if they use "blank pad". Yngvadottir (talk) 19:29, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
- Although I work in an American jurisdiction, my understanding is that the blank pad rule still exists in English law, and it may exist in other common law jurisdictions (see, e.g., this article at p.44 by Kenneth Graham, explaining the antecedents of the blank pad rule in the English common law tradition). Therefore, I think the most accurate description of the term would be to say that it is a doctrine in the common law tradition. Do you know of any English sources that refer to the doctrine by another name? Best, -- Notecardforfree (talk) 17:41, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
- I think my additions to See also and to DAB pages will help the reader unfamiliar with this translation of the Latin, but I also think the lede should make clear that this is a US legal term. Whether by adding "a United States ..." in the first sentence or by clarifying that it is the US term for a Common Law principle, I don't have the legal knowledge to determine. The article had already shown me that this is what it's called in US law. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:01, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
- To answer your questions about the title of this article, reliable sources that discuss this doctrine call it the "blank pad rule" (see, e.g., this article at page 210.) The blank pad rule is closely related to both the philosophical concept of a tabula rasa and the confrontation clause, but the term "blank pad rule" has a distinct meaning in American legal jurisprudence. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 18:32, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
I am a lawyer (and am surprised you aren't — isn't everyone?). I was more familiar with 'blank slate' or Tabula Rasa. The 7th edition of Black's Law Dictionary uses those two, but does not actually use "blank pad." I don't have a more recent edition around. So if you want to revert my addition of the citation and call it WP:Synth you might be right; and I'll not object. Suggest that we look at some criminal law dictionaries, treatises, etc. Wigmore? To the extent that this raises constitutional issue, there has got to be a law review article somewhere. Anybody have a jstor subscription? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:26, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
- Evidence scholar Kenneth Graham uses the term "blank pad rule" in his articles, (see, e.g., this article at page 210). Federal Practice and Procedure also uses the term "blank pad rule," and the term also appears in some Evidence textbooks. I wouldn't be surprised if the term "blank pad rule" is only used in America, but absent a source that confirms our suspicions, I think it would be more accurate to simply say that the "blank pad rule" is a doctrine that exists in the common law tradition. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 20:40, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Article is US-centric
[edit]I've added the "Globalise" tag to the article. All of the citations and the discussion are about the US legal system. Either the article needs a major expansion, to show application to other common law systems, or it should be re-drafted as an article about the US legal system, not the common law generally. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 14:14, 3 October 2021 (UTC)