The concept of true and fair view?

I think the concept of a "true view" is quite clearly a misnomer. You and I can stand shoulder to shoulder and see the same thing happen, and come to vastly different interpretations of what we have seen. Which interpretation is the "true" one, if neither of us is lying? Both are true, of course- your experience to you and mine to me. If both are true, and yet different, then truth is a dodgy proposition at best.

To step the other way is to accept the precept that truth, or at the very least a truthful view, is purely subjective. And if that is so, the concept of a "true view" is useless in the face of the law, which must deal with matters in a fundamentally objective way.

Either way the phrase fails as a proposition at the first hurdle.

A "fair view" is an intersting phrase, but one you would hope not to see in any rule system. Fairness is not caught up in the net of the law, rather the net of the law resides with the ocean of fairness, and takes sustenance from that. If you want a legal definition of fairness, you are hence barking up the wrong socia legal linguistic tree. Fairness is metatypical. Rules and laws are not.

Does this serve?

Uncle S