While you're better off asking lawyers, this question is fully within in the scope of the forum.

That being said, any lawyer can make any argument they want. The question is whether it will persuade the judge, who are generally sophisticated thinkers. There are times when LEM makes sense. Consider a PD trying to argue his client was both in two places at once. That violates LEM so the prosecutor argues LEM.

But there are times when LEM is inapplicable to reasoning such as motive. Do people have motives that never conflict? Of course not. There's a complex and overlapping motivation. Morality and law come in shades of gray.

So, the answer to your question is that LEM applied to reasoning is often acceptable in court, particularly because it's the simpler way to reason, and applying graded membership, for instance, is more complex.

Persuasiveness is the metric by which logic and fallacy occur in rhetoric and polemics, not obedience to logical formalisms. Law is about people.

While you're better off asking lawyers, this question is fully within in the scope of the forum.

That being said, any lawyer can make any argument they want. The question is whether it will persuade the judge, who are generally sophisticated thinkers. There are times when LEM makes sense. Consider a PD trying to argue his client was both in two places at once. That violates LEM so the prosecutor argues LEM.

But there are times when LEM is inapplicable to reasoning such as motive. Do people have motives that never conflict? Of course not. There's a complex and overlapping motivation. Morality and law come in shades of gray.

So, the answer to your question is that LEM applied to reasoning is often acceptable in court, particularly because it's the simpler way to reason, occurs frequently in legal contexts, and applying graded membership, for instance, is more complex and tougher to understand.

What this demonstrates is that logic is abstraction which models experience. Consider the relation between the transitivity of space and models of space. One needn't have mutually exclusive mathematical structures. The simplest case is a pair of overlapping Venn diagrams. In topology, neighborhoods of points overlap. Whether or not one uses LEM to describe a Venn diagram depends on the diagram it models. Some models are disjoint, and some have a union of extension. The logic that applies must cohere with the geometry. This why the Laws of Thought are abandoned for non-classical logic which has superior descriptive and predictive power as a thinking tool.

In argumentation particularly using natural language and informal logic, persuasiveness is the metric by which logic and fallacy occur in rhetoric and polemics, not obedience to logical formalisms.