The multiple epistemic injustices in the case of the cocaine bottle
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70622/2238-7110.2025.664Keywords:
epistemic injustice, criminal context, case analysisAbstract
In 2007, in her work Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing, Miranda Fricker coined the term “epistemic injustice” to characterize the different contexts in which an individual is singularly wronged with respect to his or her condition as a knowing being. This article explores the different facets through which such epistemic injustice can manifest itself based on the analysis of a criminal case of wrongful imprisonment of an innocent person — that of Daniele Toledo do Prado — in which it is clear that all these facets were present. The methodology used in the text is a bibliographic review of writings on social epistemology applied to Law.
References
ALLEN, Ronald J. The conceptual challenge of expert evidence. Discusiones Filosóficas, Caldas, CO, ano 14, n. 23, p. 41-65, jul./dez. 2013. e-ISSN: 2462-9596. Disponível em: https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/discusionesfilosoficas/issue/view/51. Acesso em: 22 dez. 2022.
DAVIS, Emmalon. Typecasts, Tokens, and Spokespersons: a case for credibility excess as testimonial injustice. Hypatia, Cambridge, UK, v. 31, n. 3, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12251. Disponível em: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/hypatia/article/abs/typecasts-tokens-and-spokespersons-a-case-for-credibility-excess-as-testimonial-injustice/DAA5EF8F3FF825FBAFC6D609600D1D97. Acesso em: 27 out. 2025.
FRICKER, Miranda. Epistemic injustice: power and the ethics of knowing. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
FRICKER, Miranda. Injustiça epistêmica: o poder e a ética do conhecimento. Tradução de Breno Santos. São Paulo: Editora da Universidade de São Paulo, 2023.
GUEDES, Michael. E se alguém te disser que nem a prova de DNA é infalível? Revista Consultor Jurídico, São Paulo, 1 mar. 2022. ISSN 1809-2829. Disponível em: https://www.conjur.com.br/2022-mar-01/guedes-alguem-te-disser-nem-prova-dna-infalivel/. Acesso em: 22 dez. 2022.
GUEDES, Michael. O que há de singularmente problemático na injustiça epistêmica por excesso de credibilidade ao testemunho do especialista? Revista do Curso de Direito do UNIFOR, Formiga, MG, v. 15, n. 1, p. 230–245, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24862/rcdu.v15i1.1735. Disponível em: https://revistas.uniformg.edu.br/cursodireitouniformg/article/view/1735. Acesso em: 27 out. 2025.
HARDWIG, J. Epistemic dependence. The Journal of Philosophy, New York, v. 82, n. 7, p. 335-349, jul. 1985. Disponível em: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2026523. Acesso em: 22 dez. 2022.
HERDY, Rachel. Ni educación, ni deferencia ciega. Hacia un modelo crítico para la valoración de la prueba pericial. Discusiones, Bahía Blanca, AR, v. 24, n. 1, p. 87-112, 2020. ISSN 1515-7326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52292/j.dsc.2020.2206. Disponível em: https://revistas.uns.edu.ar/disc/article/view/2206. Acesso em: 27 out. 2025.
HERDY, Rachel; DIAS, Juliana. Devemos admitir provas periciais de baixa fiabilidade epistêmica? Revista Consultor Jurídico, São Paulo, 2021. ISSN: 1809-2829. Disponível em: https://www.conjur.com.br/2021-mar-05/limite-penal-devemos-admitir-provas-periciais-baixa-fiabilidade-epistemica/. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2023.
HERDY, Rachel; KUNII, Paulo Akira; GUEDES, Michael. Exame de DNA: match não garante resultado justo. Jota, São Paulo, 21 mar. 2023. Disponível em: https://www.jota.info/opiniao-e-analise/colunas/quando-justica-ignora-ciencia/exame-de-dna-match-nao-garante-resultado-justo. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2023.
KASSIN, S; DROR, I; KUKUCKA, J. The forensic confirmation bias: problems, perspectives, and proposed solutions. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, Washington, DC, v. 2, n. 1, p. 42-52, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.01.001. Disponível em: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2013-09216-007. Acesso em: 27 out. 2025.
LACKEY, Jennifer. Testimony: acquiring knowledge from others. In: GOLDMAN, Alvin I.; WHITCOMB, Dennis. Social Epistemology: Essential Readings. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. Disponível em: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=096f7fe21bb9ae5ce1553514ab7f6a0927ae626b. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2023.
LACKEY, Jennifer. Credibility and the distribution of epistemic goods. In: MCCAIN, Kevin. Believing in accordance with the evidence: new essays on evidentialism. Cham: Springer Verlag, 2018. p. 145-168. Disponível em: https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites.northwestern.edu/dist/d/2354/files/2018/07/Credibility-and-the-Distribution-of-Epistemic-Goods-20mudw0.pdf. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2023.
LACKEY, Jennifer. False confessions and testimonial injustice. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Chicago, IL, v. 110, n. 1, p. 43-68, 2020. Disponível em: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7663&context=jclc. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2023.
MATIDA, Janaina. A determinação dos fatos nos crimes de gênero: entre compromissos epistêmicos e o respeito à presunção de inocência. In: NICOLITT, André; AUGUSTO, Cristiane Brandão (org.). Violência de gênero: temas polêmicos e atuais. Belo Horizonte: Editora D’Plácido, 2019.
MATIDA, Janaina. O valor probatório da palavra do policial. Boletim Revista do Instituto Baiano de Direito Processual Penal, Salvador, BA, ano 3, n. 8, p. 48-52, abr. 2020. ISSN: 2675-3189. Disponível em: https://www.academia.edu/42823372/O_valor_probat%C3%B3rio_da_palavra_do_policial. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2023.
MEDINA, José. The relevance of credibility excess in a proportional view of epistemic injustice: differential epistemic authority and the social imaginary. Social Epistemology, London, v.25, n. 1, p. 15-35, 2011. ISSN: 0269-1728. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2010.534568. Disponível em: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02691728.2010.534568. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2023.
MILLER, Joseph; ALLEN, Ronald. The common law theory of experts: deference or education? Northwestern University Law Review, Chicago, IL, v. 87, n. 4, p. 1131-1147, 1993. Disponível em: https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1933&context=fac_artchop. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2023.
TOLEDO, Daniele. Tristeza em pó. São Paulo: nVersos, 2016.
VÁZQUEZ, Carmen. De la prueba científica a la prueba pericial. Madrid-Barcelona: Marcial Pons, 2015.
YAP, Audrey S. Credibility excess and the social imaginary in cases of sexual assault. Feminist Philosophy Quarterly, Peterborough, ON, v. 3, n. 4, p. 1-24, 20 dez. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5206/fpq/2017.4.1. Disponível em: https://ojs.lib.uwo.ca/index.php/fpq/article/view/3098. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2023.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Michael Guedes
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this Journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of Constitutional Research the right of first publication with the article simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International which allows sharing the work with recognition of the authors and its initial publication in this Journal.
- Authors are able to take on additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the paper published in this Journal (eg.: publishing in institutional repository or as a book), with a recognition of its initial publication in this Journal.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish their work online (eg.: in institutional repositories or on their personal website) at any point before or during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as increase the impact and the citation of the published work (see the Effect of Open Access).
