LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC

Legal Technique and Logic Summary (Aquino's Book) 2. Argument – tries to show that something is the case, it
is intended to provide grounds to justify a claim, to show
LEGAL LOGIC SUMMARY REVIEWER that it is plausible or true.
Based on the Book: Legal Logic (Aquino)
Unsupported belief or opinion – statements about what a
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION speaker or writer happens to believe, such can be true or
false, but they are parts of arguments only if the speaker or
Logic – is the study of principles and methods of good writer claims that they follow from, or support other
reasoning. It is by means of logic that we clarify our ideas, claims.
assess the acceptability of the claims and beliefs we “I agree with the proposed Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act
encounter, defend and justify our assertions and being discussed at present in a bicameral conference
statements, and make rational and sound decisions. committee of the Congress. RA 9344 must be amended.
The minimum age of criminal liability must be lowered
Legal Reasoning – what we use when we apply laws, rules from 15 to 12.”
and regulations to particular facts and cases; what we use
when we interpret statures, when we evaluate evidence Conditional Statement – contains an if-then relationship,
and render judgements. the (if clause) is the antecedent and the (then clause) is the
consequent.
Legal Reasoning is expressed through Arguments – it is a
claim put forward and defended with reasons. Lawyers “If the Philippines adopts a parliamentary government,
become more persuasive and convincing if they develop then we will not elect a President anymore.”
the habit of speaking in arguments and not just making
assertions or claims that something is true, but support Components of Legal Reasoning:
their assertions by providing justification.
1. Issue – Any matter of controversy or uncertainty; an
Two Basis Elements of an Argument: issue is a point in dispute, in doubt, in question, or simply
up for discussion or consideration
1. Premises
2. Conclusion 2. Rule – One must be able to cite a rule, stature or
ordinance and apply it to a set of facts.
“therefore” is a word indicator for a conclusion, some
arguments don’t contain indicators, i.e: Rules have 3 parts:

“MMDA’s campaign to get rid of sidewalk vendors is right. a. Set of elements, collectively called a test
The proliferations of these sidewalk vendors slows down b. Result that occurs when all elements are present
the movement of vehicles causing heavy traffic.” c. Causal term that determines whether a result is
mandatory, prohibitory, discretionary or declaratory
(in here the 1st statement is the conclusion and the 2nd
statement serves as the premise) 3. Fact – We look for material facts, which fit the elements
of the rule.
Note: An argument always has a conclusion and a premise. Pp vs. Escobar – case where a decision was rendered even
Without one, a bunch of words is not an argument. before all the stenographic notes were transcribed, SC said
that “Every decision of a court of record shall clearly and
Explanation vs Argument: distinctly state the facts and the law which it is based” and
the lower court failed on this standard
1. Explanation – tries to show why something is the case,
to show why a thing came to exist, i.e 4. Analysis – supposed to show the link between the rules
and the facts we presented to establish what we are
“Hubert Webb and company were acquitted by the SC claiming in our argument.
because the Court found inherent inconsistencies in the
evidences provided by the prosecution.” 5. Conclusion – The ultimate end of a legal argument. It is
what the facts, rules and analysis of the case amount to.
Example of a Causal Explanation.
Criteria used to distinguish correct from incorrect
“the judge postpones the hearing because defendant failed reasoning: TRUTH and LOGIC which can be explained by
to appear in court due to unstable health condition” – the looking at the two processes involved in legal reasoning.
failure to appear brought about the postponement of the
hearing 1. Presentation of facts which pertains to the question of
TRUTH
2. Inference (deriving a claim of judgement from the given
laws or facts) which pertains to the question of LOGIC.
 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
his general reputation for truth, honesty and integrity is
Chapter 2: Fundamental Concepts in Legal Reasoning bad.

Burden of proof – the duty of any party to present evidence Dependence on Precedents
to establish his claim or defense by the amount of evidence
required by law, like preponderance of evidence in civil “Stare Decisis et non quieta movere”
cases. It is a general rule that, when a point has been settled by a
decision, it becomes precedent which should be followed
The basic rule is that the burden of proof lies upon him in subsequent cases before the same court. Only upon
who asserts it. showing that circumstances attendant in a particular case
override the great benefits derived by our judicial system
Equipoise doctrine – When the evidence of the parties is from the doctrine of stare decisis, can the courts be
evenly balanced or there is doubt on which side the justified in setting aside the same.
evidence preponderates, the decision should be against the
party with the burden of proof. Chapter 3: Deductive Reasoning in Law

Evidence – the means sanctioned by the Rules of Court, of Deduction and Induction
ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a
matter of fact. Evidence is deemed admissible if it is 1. Deductive reasoning – Each conclusion flows from its
relevant to the issue and more importantly, if it is not premises with logical necessity; this means that, given the
excluded by law or rules of court. premises, the conclusion could not be false.

“best evidence rule” – applies only when the content of “All misdemeanors are criminal offenses;
such document is the subject of the inquiry, where the Driving under the influence of alcohol is a misdemeanor;
issue is only as to whether such document was actually Hence, driving under the influence of alcohol is a criminal
executed, or exists, or on the circumstances relevant to or offense.”
surrounding its execution, the best evidence rule does not
apply and testimonial evidence is admissible. “If quartz scratches glasses, then quarts is harder than
glass;
Testimony of the witnesses – Personal knowledge is Quartz scratches glass;
needed. Hearsay is not allowed except in some cases like Therefore, quartz is harder than glass”
entries in official records made in the performance of duty
by a public officer. 2. Inductive reasoning – simply claim that their
conclusions are likely or probable given the premises
Expert Testimony – statements made by individuals who offered.
are considered as experts in a particular field
“Neil, a student in a Legal Logic class, has good study habits
Examination of Witnesses and is always attentive in class;
He is a consistent dean’s lister and has never failed any
a. Direct examination by proponent – refers to subject he has taken in law school; and
examination in chief of a witness by the party representing Therefore, it is very probable that Neil will not fail in his
him on the facts relevant to the issue. Legal Logic class.”

b. Cross-Examination by opponent – cross-examination Although it is a strong argument, it does not provide an

by the adverse party as to any matters stated in the direct absolute guarantee that Neil will not fail in his Legal Logic
examination class.

c. Redirect examination by proponent – After cross- A deductive argument moves from particular premises to a
examination, he may be re-examined by the party calling general conclusion while an inductive argument moves
him to explain or supplement his answers given during the from general to particular.
cross-examination
(deductive) Three is a prime number;
d. Re-cross-examination by opponent -adverse party Five is a prime number;
may re-cross-examine the witness on matters stated in his Seven is a prime number; and
re-direct examination Therefore, all odd numbers between two and eight are
prime numbers.
NOTE: After examination of a witness by both sides is (inductive) All of JK Rowling’s previous books have been
conducted, witness cannot be recalled without leave of bestsellers. (general premise); and
court. Moreover, witness may be impeached by the party Therefore, her next book will probably be a bestseller.
against whom he was called by contradictory evidence that (particular premise)
 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
Common indicator words for: The accused denied the charges against him.”
Sample of a negative statement:
Deductive: certainly, definitely, it is logical to conclude “No one is above the law.
that, this logically implies that, absolutely, conclusively, The accused is not guilty of the crime.”
this entails that, it must be the case that
2. Quantity – Either universal or particular. The statement
Inductive: probably, likely, chances are, one would expect is universal when what is being affirmed or denied of the
that, it is plausible to suppose that, it is reasonable to subject term is its whole extension; the statement is
assume that particular when what is being affirmed is just a part of its
extension.
Note: When no indicator words are present, we just have
to base our judgement on the content of the premises and For universal statements we usually have: all, every, no,
conclusion. none, each

Syllogisms For particular statements: some, most, several, few, almost

all, not all, many
Is a three-argument composed of the Major premise, Minor
premise and the Conclusion. Examples of universal statements:

Some deductive arguments have conclusions which do not “All law students are holders of a bachelor’s degree.”
follow necessarily from their premises. These are INVALID
deductive arguments. A VALID deductive argument is an “No statutes that are in conflict with the Constitution are
argument in which the conclusion really does follow valid.
necessarily from the premises.
Examples of particular statements:
Valid argument:
“Insulators are not electric conductors. “Some acts of vigilantism are justified.”
Rubbers are insulators; and
Therefore, rubbers are not electric conductors.” “Some criminal offenses are heinous crimes.”
Invalid argument:
“Fraud is criminal offense; Note: The Predicate of a negative statement is always
Amalilio committed a criminal offense; and universal.
Therefore, Amalilio committed fraud.”
Parts of a Categorical Syllogism
Types of Syllogisms: Categorical and Hypothetical
1. Minor Term(S) – the subject of conclusion
1. Categorical – composed of categorical statements alone. 2. Major Term(P) – predicate of conclusion
It directly asserts something or states a fact without any 3. Middle Term(M) – term found in both premises
conditions. Its subject is simply affirmed by the predicate.
“Senators are elected officials.” Three kinds of statements in a categorical syllogism:
“The Philippines is not a communist state.”
“Some crimes are against national security.” 1. Minor premise
2. Major premise
2. Hypothetical – includes both categorical and 3. Conclusion
hypothetical statements. A compound statement which
contains a proposed or tentative explanation. Usually Samples:
contains a hypothetical statement in the first premise. “All torts (M) are civil wrongs (P). (major prem)
“If the country is in danger due to invasion or rebellion, the Negligence (S) is a tort (M). (minor prem)
Pres can declare Martial Law.” Therefore, negligence (S) is a civil wrong (P)
“The breach of contract is either actual or anticipatory.” (conclusion).”

Categorical Syllogisms “All contracts with vague terms (P) are void (M).
(major prem)
Properties of a Categorical Syllogism This contract (S) is not void (M). (minor prem)

1. Quality – may be affirmative or negative, a statement Therefore, this contract (S) does not contain vague terms
with terms “no, not, none and never” is negative and in the (P). (conclusion)”
absence of such then it is affirmative
Rules for Validity of Categorical Syllogisms
Sample of an affirmative statement:
“Some crimes are punishable by imprisonment.
 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
Rule 1: The syllogism must not contain 2 negative Hypothetical Syllogisms – contains a hypothetical
premises. statement as one of its premises. There are three kinds:
(conditional, disjunctive and conjunctive)
Rule 2: There must be three pairs of univocal terms.
-The terms in the syllogism must have exactly the same Conditional Syllogism – (if-then relationship) but can
meaning and must be used exactly the same way in each also be expressed in a wide variety of different sentences
occurrence. such as:

Sample: “Being a teenager these days means. . .”

“What is natural is good. “The fact that she. . . implies that.”

To make a mistake is natural. “Anyone who. . . must be a. . . .”

Therefore, the Congress can abolish the law of supply and “Unless you are. . .you will not. . .”
demand.” (Invalid)
“Whenever heavy rains pour, Españ a is flooded.”
The term natural is used with two different meanings, the
first is something pure while the second is means as “In case. . . you will. . .”
something normal or usual.
If you write these statements in if-then forms, their
“Selling cigars to a person below 18 years is unlawful. meaning will be the same.

That store sold cigars to a student below 18 years. Conditional Syllogism can be symbolized by:
A – antecedent
Therefore, the store has violated the law.” (Valid) C – consequent
~ - negation of the statement
This is valid since the terms “below 18 years” was used in > - implies
the same sense. - for therefore

Note: Violation of this rule is referred to as the Fallacy of Rules for Conditional Syllogisms
Equivocation
1. When the minor premise affirms the antecedent,
Rule 3: The middle term must be universal at least once. conclusion must affirm the consequent. (modus ponens)

Rule 4: If the term in the conclusion is universal, the same “If it rains, then the ground will be wet. A>C
term in the premise must be also universal. It rained. A
Therefore, the ground is wet. C
Samples:
2. When minor premise denies the consequent, conclusion
-“All lawyers read the Philippine Daily inquirer. must deny the antecedent. (modus Tollens)
All lawyers are literate.
Therefore, all who read the Philippine Daily Inquirer are “If it rains, then the ground will be wet. A>C
literate.” (Invalid) The ground is not wet. ~C
The minor term “those who read the Philippine Daily Therefore, it did not rain. ~A
Inquirer” is universal in the conclusion but particular in
the premise. This is called the fallacy of illicit minor. 3. A conditional syllogism is invalid if the minor premise
denies the antecedent. (fallacy of denying the antecedent)
- “Felonies are criminal offenses.
Misdemeanors are not felonies. “If it rains, then the ground will be wet. A>C
Therefore, misdemeanors are not criminal offenses.” The ground is wet. C
(Invalid) Therefore, it rained. A
The major term “criminal offenses” is universal in the
conclusion but particular in the premise. This is called the Enthymemes -An argument that can be founded on a
fallacy of illicit major. syllogism although not all parts of the syllogism are
expressed. This kind of argument is stated incompletely,
- “All acts that inflict more harm than good are unjust. part being understood, or only in the mind, is called such.
All terrorist acts inflict more harm than good.
Therefore, all terrorist acts are unjust.” (Valid) “Manuel has been seen running away from a building
where a burglar alarm is ringing.
 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
Manuel is more likely to be the burglar.” Therefore, all frogs are not reptiles.”
Through mere inspection, one can see that the argument is
This implies that People who flee from the scene are more illogical.
likely guilty than if they did not flee.
-Informal fallacies are those that can be detected only
Polysyllogism – a series of syllogisms in which the through analysis of the content of the argument.
conclusion of one syllogism supplies a premise of the next
syllogism. (Note: Can be lots of syllogisms in order to “It’s just right to give this student a passing mark. You see,
produce a desired conclusion.) she is troubled by serious family problems at present.
Her family can’t afford her education; it’s her aunt who
Chapter 4: Inductive Reasoning in Law pays her tuition fee. If she fails in M-101, she might not be
supported anymore by her aunt.”
These give us truth or information more than what the
premises are saying. What is claimed in the conclusion If simplified:
goes beyond the evidence found in the premises.
“All students with serious family problems should not be
Inductive Generalizations – an argument that relied on given a failing mark.
characteristics of a sample population to make a claim Q is a student with serious family problems.
about the population as a whole. Therefore, Q should not be given a failing mark.”

It uses evidence about a limited number of people or In this case, one would find it valid and logical but the
things of a certain type to make a general claim about a erroneous reasoning can be found in the content which
larger group of people or things of that type. says that – the basis in giving a passing or failing mark is
his or her family situation rather than his or her
Samples: performance in class.

“All law students are required to study taxation.” Fallacies of Ambiguity

“Hearsays are not admissible in courts.” 1. Equivocation – leading an opponent to an unwarranted

conclusion by using a term in its different senses and
Analogical Arguments – a comparison of things based on making it appear to have only one meaning.
similarities those things share, it can sometimes be
encountered in poems or songs. “Gambling should be legalized because it is something we
can’t avoid.
“Perhaps love is like a resting place, It is an integral part of human experience;
A shelter from the storm, People gamble everytime they get in their cars or decide to
It exists to give you comfort, get married.”
It is there to keep you warm. . .”
The first use of gambling refers to games of chances while
Most of our everyday reasoning is based on analogy. Joan the second use refers to the risk feature of life itself.
reasons that her new pair of shoes will be durable on the
grounds that her other shoes with the same brand and (Using one term and applying two meanings in a
make have been durable. Just like an inductive argument, statement.)
there is no mathematical certainty in analogical
arguments. However, the claims of these arguments may Lambino vs COMELEC – a case regarding the initiative of
still be accepted. changing the 1987 Constitution, such changes that would
shift the present Bicameral-Presidential system to a
Criteria’s of Analogical Arguments Unicameral-Parliamentary government. The framers of the
Constitution intended to adopt relevant American
-Relevance of Similarities jurisprudence on people’s initiative, and the people must
-Relevance of Dissimilarities first see the full text of the proposed amendments before
they sign and that people should sign on a petition
Chapter 5: Fallacies of Legal Reasoning containing such full text.

Formal and Informal Fallacies However, the Lambino group only gathered signatures and
they theorized that the difference of amendment and
-Formal fallacies are those that may be identified through revision is only one of procedure and not of substance.
mere inspection of the form and structure of the argument
Court ruled that the express intent and plain language of
“All turtles are reptiles. the Constitution contradict the Lambino group’s theory.
All frogs are not turtles.
 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
With the language of the law being clear and plain, courts Example, it is fallacious to argue that,
do not deviate from such intent and language. “because a lawyer earns more than a secretary, therefore
all lawyers earn more than all secretaries”
2. Amphiboly – presenting a claim or argument whose
meaning can be interpreted in two or more ways due to its Another example:
grammatical construction, in equivocation the ambiguity
comes from changing the meaning of the word while in “Roger Federer and Martina Hingis are two of the best
amphiboly, ambiguity comes from the way the sentence is tennis players in the world, so if these two Swiss players
constructed. team up, they’d make one of the best mixed doubles
teams.”
“The loot and the car were listed as stolen by the Manila Indeed, the two players are very difficult to defeat when
Police District.” they play individually, but it does not follow that they will
also be very difficult to defeat when they play together as a
“CHR lawyers give poor free legal advice.” team.

“Mayors can’t stop gambling.” 6. Division – consists in wrongly assuming that what is
true in general is true in particular, this is the reverse of
“Police help dog bite victim.” the fallacy of composition.

3. Improper Accent – consists in misleading people by To argue that, since PNP is one of the most corrupt
placing improper emphasis on a word, phrase or particular agencies, therefore these three policemen cannot be
aspect of an issue or claim, can be found not only in trusted, is to commit the fallacy of division.
advertisements and headlines but also in other very
common forms of human discourse. Fallacies of Irrelevance

This newspaper headline for example: 1. Argumentum ad Hominem (Personal Attack) – this
fallacy ignores the issue by focusing on certain personal
“President to Declare Martial Law.” characteristics of an opponent, instead of addressing the
issue presented by an opponent this argument makes the
This may lead one to infer that the President has opponent the issue.
immediate plans to declare martial law but the article
might simply be reporting an interview with the President Two kinds of Argumentum ad Hominem:
which she said she might declare martial law if military
officers defy the chain of command, and other probable a. Abusive – attacks the argument based on the arguer’s
reasons for such. reputation, personality or some personal shortcoming

4. Vicious Abstraction – misleading the people by using “X’s statement must be wrong because X is a socialist.”
vague or abstract terms.
“According to this action star, he supports the death
Example. penalty because it is an effective deterrence against
murder. This is nonsense. He is just an actor and knows
If one assumes that the specific meaning of the SC’s notion nothing about death penalty. Besides, he likes violence as
of “community standards” can be reduced to a formula like shown by his many movies which depict a lot of killings.”
“whatever presently offends more than 50% of the people
in the community” and then uses a highly questionable These examples focuses its attention on the character of
assigned meaning to the term to draw a conclusion about the person which is not the issue.
the legality of an act, then one can be said to be misusing a
vague expression. b. Circumstantial – consists in defending one’s position by
accusing his or her critic or other people of doing the same
“Since the act involving pornographic materials was not in thing.
accordance with community standards, then this act
should be regarded as against the law.” It is not logical to absolve one’s self of his or her own guilt
by saying that the opponent has done the same thing.
It would appear that perhaps no effective use of the term
“community standards” could be applied to any situation Example.
without misusing a vague expression.
“I don’t think the opposition party has a valid reason for
5. Composition – wrongly inferring that what holds true of criticizing the move of the present administration to
the individuals automatically holds true of the group made privatize government-run industries.
up of those individuals.
 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
When the opposition party was in power in the previous comes and who go home at night when the light has faded
regime, it sold several government companies like from the sky and give their life, their strength, their toil to
NAPOCOR and MWSS to the private sector.” make others rich and great. I appeal to you in the name of
those women who are offering up their lives to this
The speaker committed tu quoque (you’re another) modern god of gold, and I appeal to you in the name of
because he or she focused on what the opposition did those children, the living and the unborn.”
when it was in power before which is not the issue in this
case. 3. Argumentum ad Baculum (Appeal to Force) –
persuading others to accept a position by using threat or
Sample cases: pressure instead of presenting evidence for one’s view.
The strength of this lies on the fear it creates to people
In re Borromeo – Joaquin Borromeo is not a lawyer but which leads them to agree with the argument.
learned a few legal principles and procedural rules. He
represented himself in several court proceedings where he Example.
disrespected the SC several times.
“The President wants the Congress to pass this bill, I think
Court declared him guilty of contempt of court. His actions you have to support it. Of course, you don’t want
as well as allegations are clearly examples of what we call Malacañ ang to reduce your Priority Development
as argumentum ad hominem. Assistance Fund which will finance your infrastructure
projects in your town.”
Mane vs Judge Belen – Atty. Mane charged the judge for
humiliating, demeaning and berating him during a hearing However, not all threats involve fallacies. If certain
when he was counsel. Based on the transcript, the judge consequences are a natural outcome of an action, calling its
criticized the complainant that he did not graduate from attention would be very much appreciated.
UP Law.
Parent to a teen. “You must not stay late at the party. There
SC declared the judge guilty of conduct unbecoming of a is a lot of danger in traveling late at night. You might get
judge and reprimanded him for such actions. In addition, raped or robbed.”
for a judge to determine the fitness or competence of a
lawyer based on alma mater is a clear example of an Sy vs Fineza – case where the court suspended Fineza, that
argumentum ad hominem. his actions constituted abuse of authority Fineza was
suspended for acting with malice and bad faith when he
Santos vs Aranzano – Civil case praying a decree of raised the bail of an accused.
adoption to be null and void ab initio that the application
was not signed by both adopting parents. 4. Petitio Principii (Begging the Question) – designed to
persuade people by means of the wording of one of its
Petitioner claimed that CFI has no jurisdiction and premises
contended that if the spouses were alive, they would never
question the adoption because what is more important to A. Arguing in Circle – makes use of its conclusion to serve
them is the welfare of their adopted daughters. as its premise

Court granted the petition due to jurisdictional grounds “Gina: This person has committed bribery.
but observed that the statement is an argumentum ad Jeff: What reasons do you have that will convince me that
hominem since it attributes without basis, an attitude to your claim is true?
someone long dead. Gina:Because he tried to influence a public official by
giving money.”
2. Argumentum ad Misericordiam (Appeal to Pity) – the In this argument, Gina only explained what the act of
judge is persuaded to accept an argument not for its bribery means. Jeff asked her for reasons for making the
strength but because of the counsel’s emotional appeal to claim. Gina, however, gave no such reasons; she merely
pity, this fallacy convinces people by evoking feelings of repeated her claim.
compassion and sympathy when such feelings, are not
logically relevant to the arguer’s conclusion. B. Question – Begging Language – consists in discussing
an issue by means of language that assumes a position of
A classic example is the closing speech of Clarence Darrow the very question at issue, in such a way as to direct the
when he defended Thomas Kidd. listener to that same conclusion, this prematurely assumes
that a matter that is or may be at issue has already been
“I appeal to you not for Thomas Kidd, but I appeal to you settled Prosecutor to witness: “Would you tell us, Ms. Diaz,
for the long line – the long, long line reaching back through about the nature of your relationship with the rapist, Mr.
the ages and forward to the years to come – the long line of Sanchez?”
despoiled and downtrodden people of the earth. I appeal to The prosecutor uses language in his question that begs the
you for those men who rise in the morning before daylight very question in the courtroom. An alert defense attorney
 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
would object vigorously to the implicit argument 2. Argumentum ad Verecundiam (Appeal to
embedded in this question-begging language. Inappropriate Authority) – Consists in persuading others
by appealing to people who command respect or authority
C. Complex Question – consists in asking a question in but do not have legitimate authority in the matter at hand.
which some presuppositions are buried in that question,
another term used to this is loaded question, which Example 1:
suggests that more than one question is being asked in
what appears to be a single question. “The doctrine of biological evolution cannot be true, for it
contradicts the biblical account of creation; the church
Example. “Did you and your brother went to the mall with fathers never accepted it and the fundamentalists explicitly
the victim and gave him the drug?” condemn it.”

A closer look at the question reveals that it involves at least What is wrong in the argument above is its reliance to
4 questions. certain authorities who, although respected, are not the
appropriate authority on this matter since the issue is
It asks: if the respondent went to the mall with the victim, about science.
if the respondent gave the drug to the victim, if the
respondent’s brother went to the mall with the victim, if -Another type of inappropriate authority is a biased one.
the respondent’s brother gave the drug to the victim. Some people may be qualified in a particular field, yet they
are vitally interested in or affected by the issue at stake
D. Leading Question – directing the respondent to give a that there would be good reason to treat their testimony
particular answer to a question at issue by the manner in with suspicion.
which the question is asked, this usually involves asking
only one question that contains an unsupported claim. Example 2:

Consider a lawyer who leads her client in the following “Jose Javier Reyes, director of the movie
manner: Live show, said in a press conference that MTRCB has
unjustly banned the movie from being shown. According to
“You were outside the country when the crime was Reyes, the movie is not pornographic since it has a very
committed, weren’t you?” relevant plot and a well-written storyline. Since Reyes is a
veteran in Philippine cinema, we can say that indeed
The defense lawyer is leading the witness by assuming a MTRCB acted wrongly in banning the said movie.”
position on the very question at issue. Even though the
lawyer maybe convinced that the defendant was not in the 3. Accident – Applying a general rule to a particular case.
country – that is, her client is innocent – a proper
procedure for getting at the truth would be to encourage Example.
the witness to explain as to his whereabouts when the
crime was committed. “Freedom of speech is a constitutionally guaranteed right.
Therefore, Leo should not be arrested for his speech that
Fallacies of Insufficient Evidence incited the riot last week.”

1. Argumentum ad Antiquum (Appeal to the Ages) – In this argument, the general rule is that freedom of speech
This attempts to persuade others of a certain belief by is normally guaranteed, and the specific case is the speech
appealing to their feelings of reverence or respect for some made by Leo. Because the speech incited a riot, the rule
tradition, instead of giving rational basis for such belief. does not apply.
This is illogical since pointing out that a particular practice
has the status of a tradition sheds no light on whether it Sample Cases:
should be followed or not.
TBAP vs COMELEC – Petitioners challenged the validity of
Example. BP 881 which requires broadcast companies to provide
free airtime to COMELEC for the use of candidates for
“I don’t understand why the Church allowed cremation of campaign.
the dead. In our time, we have not been taught to burn the Court ruled that all broadcast companies whether radio or
bodies of our dead loved ones. It was not done when my tv are licensed by the government and the franchises
lolo and lola died, as well as when tatay and nanay died. granted to them are mere privileges. As regards the
We should not also do that to any of our relatives.” contention that the law singles out radio and tv stations to
provide free air time rests on the fallacy that broadcast
The reasoning is fallacious because what was true before media are to be treated the same as print media.
may not be true at present given the social, cultural and
physical changes in our society and the world at large.
 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
Their plea to invalidate the said law would pave the way You surely don’t want terrorism to prevail in our country.”
for rich candidates monopolizing the media giving The arguer here presupposes that there are only two
disadvantage to candidates with less resource. alternatives: implement warrantless arrests to stop
terrorism or not and let terrorism prevail. What is wrong
People vs Gacott – Case where judge dismissed a criminal here is that it overlooks the fact that there can be other
case despite failure in checking the citations of the ways of dealing with terrorism.
prosecution. SC annulled the dismissal and sanction the
judge with reprimand and a fine for ignorance of the law. A common way to commit false dilemma is to treat
The Constitution provides that the SC en banc shall have contraries as if they were contradictories.
the power to discipline judges of lower courts.
The color is either black or non-black (contradictories – a
However, a decision en banc is only needed when the term and its negative).
penalty to be imposed in the dismissal of a judge is for
more than 1 year or a fine exceeding 10k or both. The color could be neither black nor white (both extremes
to be false – contraries – a term and its opposite)
4. Hasty Generalization (Converse Accident) – Consists
in drawing a general or universal conclusion from CLASS NOTES
insufficient particular case. We take a particular case and Fallacy – purpose is to deceive, taken from the word
make a general rule or truth out of that. “falio” which means I deceive you.

Example. Kinds of Fallacies:

“A survey of the member of the MILF and their families 1. Fallacy of Expression
showed that more than 85% of them favor the proposal to a. Equivocation
have a separate independent government in Mindanao, b. Amphiboly
10% disapprove and 5% are undecided. c. Composition
d. Division
These survey results clearly show that majority of Filipino
Muslims supports the said proposal.” 2. Non-sequential Fallacy
a. Ignorantia elinchi
The basis for claiming that majority of Filipino Muslims i. Argumentum ad hominem
supports the proposal is not adequate to support this claim ii. Argumentum ad misericordiam
since it only pertains to MILF and their families which do iii. Argumentum ad baculum
not represent the whole Filipino Muslim population.
3. Begging the Question
5. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam (Arguing from Basis of Decisions:
Ignorance) – Consists in assuming that a particular claim 1. Policy
is true because its opposite cannot be proven. Using the a. Effects:
absence of evidence against a claim as justification that it is i. For making the law
true. ii. For interpreting the law
2. Principle
Example. 3. Precedent

“Since science cannot prove that breathing the same air as Laws are applied in:
an AIDS victim will not result in the spread of the virus, 1. Litigation – involves past incidents which have to be
children with AIDS should not be allowed to attend public proved by evidence
schools.”
2. Contracts – most of the facts are still to be established in
6. False Dilemma – Arises when the premise of an accordance with the law and procedure
argument presents us with a choice between two
alternatives and assumes that they are exhaustive when in Sources of Facts:
fact they are not. Being pregnant and not being pregnant
are exhaustive alternatives since there is no other a. Client
alternative. b. Witnesses

Example. i. Biased
ii. Non-Biased
“Many people are protesting the implementation of
warrantless arrests. I think it is just right for that can Art. 315 of the RPC (Estafa) vs BP 22????
facilitate the military’s crackdown on terrorist groups. In Art 315 the element of deceit is needed while with BP
22 mere issuance of a check suffices.
 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
Valid defense for a charge under BP 22?????
Forgery:)

Source: https://www.studocu.com/ph/document/san-
beda-university/law/legal-technique-and-logic-
summary/9034438