The empirical material concerning the Swiss forensic practice presented here sheds light on the manner of how “forensic truth”, i.e. judicial facts are produced and what
kind of standards are used. In Switzerland, such standards are poor or not developed.
The study shows a secondariness of statutory substantive law on the forensic decision in comparison to the construction of judicial facts and the everyday knowledge
of judges. This finding contrasts with the poor or absent code of practice, especially in criminal procedures.
The secondariness of statutory substantive law and poor standards of the production of judicial facts in the judicial practice corresponds with the increasing importance of everyday knowledge of judges for the decision making. This contains in itself the danger of a compelling influence of the everyday knowledge of judges on the judicial decisions without any means of control.