This book explores a neglected area of criminal procedure, and contributes to a broader debate on the challenges judges face today due to, among others, the evolving relationship between science and..Featuring signs of polarisation and the erosion of facts, as well as a wealth of easilyaccessible information, today's developed democracies seem to have given rise to aculture where information is sought routinely and on, practically, anything that sparksone's interest. Modern judges, too, operate in this environment and, presumably, conduct(non‑) trivial (Internet) research like most of us. This becomes all the more plausible whenjudges face unfamiliar, non-routine, scientifically or otherwise factually complex disputes, orincomplete and/or ambiguous trial evidence. Indeed, these circumstances may nudge theminto gathering information, independently, that is supplementary to the evidence obtainedat trial and aimed at gaining a richer understanding of a dispute's factual background. Doingso may offer certain benefits in light of trial expediency and court legitimacy. However, itmay just as well elicit concerns with regard to judicial impartiality, (perceived) bias, andfundamental fair trial guarantees.