Abstract This paper explores the possibilities of a methodological framing treating evidentiary adjudication simultaneously as a practical-prudential judicium and as a narrative use of language (this latter giving a very specific role to Bernard Jackson’s purely intensional understanding of meaning and his counterpoint between the story in the trial and the story of the trial ). Its purpose is actually to ask whether the contribution of this framing can plausibly be enriched (or whether it is instead disturbed or even rejected) when we pay attention to the explosion of the “viserbal”—determining an inevitable encounter between “law and its other, the social” (bringing the “world to the courtroom”, as well as “the courtroom to the world”)—and to the aspiration for a “juristic methodology of looking” (of “seeing” the event), this to be seriously taken as a step in the search for a full “retinal justice”. My conclusion is that the visual dimension may have a productive methodological implication in the meaning of the story of the trial : I admit actually that this may be reconstituted as a performance to be heard and to be seen (confined to the “unity of time and space” of the theatre of law and thus submitted to the eye-camera of the judge- trier of fact ).
J. M. Aroso Linhares (Fri,) studied this question.