While it is easy to assume that the system of criminal justice in nineteenth-century England was not unlike the modern one, in many ways it was very different, particularly before the series of Victorian reforms that gradually codified a system dependent on judge-made precedent. In the first half of the century capital cases often tried almost summarily, with the accused not being adequately represented and without a system of appeal. There were also fundamental differences in procedure and in the rules of evidence, as indeed there were in attitudes towards crime and criminals. David Bentley has provided an account of the nineteenth-century criminal justice system as a whole, from the crimes committed and the classification of offences to the different courts and their procedure. He describes the stages of criminal prosecution -- committal, indictment, trial, verdict and punishment -- and the judges, lawyers and juries, highlighting significant changes in the rules of evidence during the century. He looks at the reform of the old system and assesses how far it was brought about by lawyers themselves and how far by external forces. Finally, he considers the fairness of the system, both as seen by contemporaries and in modern terms.

'The role of the European judiciary in the process of European integration cannot be overestimated. The achievements of European integration after the second world war are usually analyzed from the perspective of political decisions that were made, initially, by the Founding Fathers and, subsequently, by the political leaders of the European countries. However, in the public debate we very often forget how much we owe to the two supreme jurisdictions of Europe, that is the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. The continuing extension of the competences of the European Union, especially in the field of economic and monetary policy, calls for a new assessment of the nature of the decision-making process at the European level.'-- From the foreword by Prof. Maciej Szpunar, Advocate General at the Court of Justice of the European Union'The European judiciary i.e. the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and national courts interpreting and applying European law sensu largo have shaped [the process of European integration] actively, alongside the Founding Fathers, European nations, European states and their citizens. The involvement of the judiciary raises its own wide range of questions concerning the very nature of democracy. Much ink has already been spilled over issues such as democratic legitimacy, subsidiarity and accountability, the rule of law or judicial activism.[...] seventeen scholars from across Europe [...] share their views on the European judiciary as a challenge for democracy. The various contributions to the present volume are split into two parts. The first provides ten chapters on the judicial systems of the European Union (EU), discussing, inter alia, recognition of democratic principles in the case law of the CJEU, contribution thereof to the democratisation of the Union and reception of EU law in the Member States. The second part discusses the judicial means to protect human rights in Europe, consisting of three chapters devoted to the promise of advisory opinions of the ECtHR as well as to democratic standards for voting and for fair trial.'-- From the preface by the Editors'[...] the editors, authors and the publisher of this volume decided to take a closer look at the relation between democracy and activities of something that might be called ''European judicial systems''. And what is intriguing these systems are perceived here as a challenge for democracy.[...] This book does not exhaust all problems and issues for European judicial systems confronted with the very notion of democracy; there are simply too many of them. But it comes with a fresh look on perhaps the most pertinent ones, like the issue of the legal creativity of judges in both Luxembourg and Strasbourg. It was worth waiting for this volume.'-- Prof. Dr. Paul De Hert, Free University Brussels and Tilburg University

This remarkably original and vital work argues that the problems are rooted in a disjunction between prevailing values and the prevailing doctrinal regime in constitutional law. Dripps asserts that the Fourteenth Amendment's more general standards of due process and equal protection encompass the values that ought to govern the criminal process.

Why does the American criminal justice system punish too many innocent people, failing to punish so many guilty parties and imposing a disproportionate burden on blacks? This remarkably original and vital work argues that the problems are rooted in a disjunction between prevailing values and the prevailing doctrinal regime in constitutional law. Dripps asserts that the Fourteenth Amendment's more general standards of due process and equal protection encompass the values that ought to govern the criminal process.

Criminal procedure ought to be about protecting the innocent, punishing the guilty, and doing equal justice. Modern legal doctrine, however, hinders these pursuits by concentrating on the specific procedural safeguards contained in the Bill of Rights. Dripps argues that a renewed focus on the Fourteenth Amendment would be more consistent than current law with both our values and with the legitimate sources of Constitutional law, and will promote the instrumental values the criminal process ought to serve. Legal and constitutional scholars will find his account of our criminal systeM's disarray compelling, and his argument as to how it may be reconstructed important and provoking.

This timely collection examines the record of current and recent justices in fashioning the Constitution and looks at the larger political context in which their work has occurred. The eight essays, written by distinguished scholars of the Supreme Court, review the achievements of current Justices O'Connor and Rehnquist as well as recent justices Douglas, Black, and Harlan. The essay on Justice O'Connor is one of the first overall assessments of her record to appear in print. Editor D. Grier Stephenson, Jr.'s introductory chapter presents an insightful overview of the Supreme Court's role in American government today. Collectively these chapters make a rich contribution to an understanding of constitutional government and render a complex subject both accessible to general readers and interesting to experts. Following editor Stephenson's cogent introduction, Henry AbrahaM's Can Presidents Really Pack the Supreme Court? focuses on the political and intellectual environments within which the Supreme Court functions and on the candidates selected by presidents to sit on the High Bench. In Chapter Three, former solicitor general Rex E. Lee zeroes on a central aspect of, and a key player in, the judicial process. Leadership and the relationships among the justices are the subject of Chapter Four. Harold J. Spaeth's essay on Justice Sandra Day O'Connor emphasizes personality as an element contributing to the Court's decisions. The legacy of Justice William O. Douglas and the impact of the Court's past on its present decisions are both examined by Walter Murphy. Similarly, the next chapter's study of Justice John Marshall Harlan shows the importance of the Constitutional legacy in understanding the Supreme Court. Affirmative Action and the Supreme Court reviews the responses of current members of the Court to one of the most divisive and significant policy questions of our time. The concluding essay surveys Chief Justice Rehnquist and the Future of the Supreme Court. This volume is important reading for students of law, history, and political science.

An extensive exploration of the major decisions and personalities of the Supreme Court during the 14-year tenure of Chief Justice Morrison Remick Waite. The Waite Court: Justices, Rulings, and Legacy presents a fresh interpretation of the Supreme Court under the tenure of Chief Justice Morrison Remick Waite (1874-1888). An in-depth analysis of key decisions demonstrates how the Waite Court confronted such profound issues as the post-Civil War rights of African Americans and state regulations intended to cope with rampant industrialization. Highlighting the Court's most famous decision, Munn v. Illinois, which upheld legislation regulating railroad and grain elevator rates, this careful analysis also reviews the Court's unique involvement in the 1876 presidential election electoral predicament. Profiles of the 15 justices who served on the Waite Court include extensive descriptions of the five that rank among the most outstanding justices ever to serve on the Supreme Court. A-Z entries on key people, laws, cases, events, and concepts that were relevant during the Waite Court era, including the growing volume of state economic regulations enacted to cope with industrial expansion and urban growth fueled by the Civil War and by a nationwide rail network for people and goods An appendix including a timeline of important events for the years 1865 through 1890, plus excerpts from other important source materials, such as landmark decisions of the Waite Court

This provocative book brings together twenty-plus contributors from the fields of law, economics, and international relations to look at whether the U.S. legal system is contributing to the country's long postwar decline. The book provides a comprehensive overview of the interactions between economics and the law - in such areas as corruption, business regulation, and federalism - and explains how our system works differently from the one in most countries, with contradictory and hard to understand business regulations, tort laws that vary from state to state, and surprising judicial interpretations of clearly written contracts. This imposes far heavier litigation costs on American companies and hampers economic growth.

Drawing on representative corpora of transcripts from over 100 English criminal jury trials, this stimulating new book explores the nature of 'legal-lay discourse', or the language used by legal professionals before lay juries. Careful analyses of genres such as witness examination and the judge's summing-up reveal a strategic tension between a desire to persuade the jury and the need to conform to legal constraints. The book also suggests ways of managing this tension linguistically to help, not hinder, the jury.

Forensic Document Examination: Principles and Practice is the first textbook written specifically for the study of questioned document analysis. The text comprehensively reviews document examination, with specific attention to handwriting identification and forgery detection. Fundamental principles and techniques of document examination are presented throughout in a concise, straightforward manner. Specific concepts attended to include the factors that affect handwriting; the characteristics of handwriting; the guidelines for determining the authenticity or spuriousness of handwriting; and the proper methods for examining a case from start to finish. For the first time, criminal justice students and others requiring an introduction to document analysis will have a resource to consult that outlines the proper method for analyzing handwriting and a detailed procedure for preparing a document case.

In addition to its utility as a textbook for document analysis, Forensic Document Examination: Principles and Practice will be an invaluable resource for professionals in fields where interaction with document examiners is commonplace. Police officers, private investigators, and attorneys will all benefit from a basic understanding of document examination and what is required for a document examiner to complete an assignment.

In this book, readers will take a fascinating journey with local prosecutors as they seek to obtain reasonable and appropriate case dispositions while preventing abuse and misuse of the law and protecting the civil rights of their jurisdictions. Prosecutors have a powerful and generally little-understood role in the criminal justice system. Their important powers include accepting or rejecting cases, making decisions about dismissing charges, or moving cases to disposition and recommending a sentence-all of which can critically affect not only individuals but society through their ability to shape our criminal justice system. The Power of the Prosecutor: Gatekeepers of the Criminal Justice System explores the real-world actions and outcomes of local prosecutors through five well-known cases, documenting the variety of pressures prosecutors face both within and outside their offices as they attempt to make the best decisions about crimes and defendants. Written by individuals who have actively engaged prosecutors in practically every U.S. state over 30 years' time, the book examines actual case profiles that enable readers to witness how prosecutors reach their behind-the-scenes decisions and grasp how the criminal justice system operates. The authors explain the variations in prosecution, including the effects of policies and priorities, action choices available, and the types of both internal and external relationships with other participants in the system: the police, the courts, the defense counsel, and the community they represent. Readers will come away with in-depth knowledge and understanding of the complexities and pressures faced by prosecutors in upholding justice under a wide variety of conditions. Offers understandable explanations of why outcomes vary so widely in the criminal justice system-for example, why one prosecutor's office uses drug treatment programs for first-time offenders and another seeks jail time Answers many of the questions raised in Ferguson, MO, and Staten Island, NY, about the role of prosecutors and their discretionary powers Presents specific well-known cases to enhance readers' understanding of the intended/unintended consequences of our adversarial system of justice Addresses in detail the complex relationships between various parts of the U.S. criminal justice system

This book focuses on decision-making by non-state justice institutions at the interface of traditional, religious, and state laws. The authors discuss the implications of non-state justice for the rule of law, presenting case studies on traditional councils and courts in Pakistan, South Sudan, Ethiopia, Bolivia and South Africa.

This book focuses on the world's first publicly-funded body- the Criminal Cases Review Commission- to review alleged miscarriages of justice, set up following notorious cases such as the Birmingham Six in the UK. Providing a critique of its operations, the book shows that its help to innocent victims of wrongful conviction is merely incidental.

This volume combines both the broader and narrower aspects of school-related law to provide increased understanding of the legal realities and responsibilities of American teachers and administrators. The book depicts the flow of authority in American polity, from the national level in the Constitution's grant of power in the Tenth Amendment to the local level in the development of policy by local school boards. Selected statutes and cases provide a framework of national rulings on educational matters, but the emphasis is on the role of the state as the critical force in decision making for schools. This book is pragmatic, rather than theoretical, and is aimed at the practitioner. Citations provide ready reference for dealing with daily problems that may have legal ramifications.

* Bridges the disciplines of litigation and neuropsychology in a modern UK context. * Conveys the complexity and huge amount of research data into an accessible medicolegal based neuropsychology text with relevance for both lawyers and psychologists. * A scientifically oriented exploration based on real-life case examples

This book examines the nature of evidence for character judgments, using a model of abductive reasoning called Inference To The Best Explanation. The book expands this notion based on recent work with models of reasoning using argumentation theory and artificial intelligence. The aim is not just to show how character judgments are made, but how they should be properly be made based on sound reasoning, avoiding common errors and superficial judgments.

In The Role of State Supreme Courts in the New Judicial Federalism, Susan P. Fino presents a comprehensive analysis of the work of the state supreme court in the context of the new emphasis of states' rights. She provides both quantitative and qualitative data on state supreme court decisions, and includes an analysis of over 1,200 opinions rendered by six selected courts, thus laying the foundation for a systematic study of the state supreme court system. Fino also presents hypotheses to explain the variations in decision making observed from state to state. Her work concludes with observations on the prospects for an enhanced role for the state supreme court system, and suggestions for improving the institution.

Product information not available.

The famous "Kadi" cases have generated a wealth of articles dealing with the legal problems involved in EU implementation of UN Security Council sanctions. Less attention has been devoted to the numerous legal problems involved in the EU's own "autonomous" sanctions system. The subject is nevertheless topical since there is a growing use of sanctions and the legal basis for sanctions has been changed with the Lisbon treaty. EU sanctions are used both against regimes and suspected terrorist financing. But these sanctions have developed "organically", without sufficient thought being given to certain basic issues (inter alia concerning procedural fairness). This has resulted in considerable litigation before the Court of Justice (CJEU). The new legal basis and the recent judgments from the CJEU have solved some difficulties, but "taking sanctions seriously" means new problems for national implementation, spanning over a variety of areas: criminal law, constitutional law, international law and European law. The essays in this book, written by distinguished scholars in their respective fields, deal with some of these issues. How should we go about measuring the impact(s) of targeted sanctions? How coherent are these "administrative" measures of blacklisting with other existing and proposed EU measures in justice and home affairs promoting the criminal law model for dealing with the problem of terrorism (investigation, trial, conviction, punishment/confiscation of assets)? How can the problems caused for fair trial by the use of intelligence material be solved? If we can (or must) continue to have sanctions in the area of terrorist financing, can they be made compatible with fundamental principles of national criminal law and criminal policy? How does a system of "composite" decision-making (when the measure is partly national and partly at the EU level) avoid the risk that gaps arise in systems of legal protection? What is the spillover effect of "overbroad" quasi-criminal legislation directed at organizations, in the constitutional/human rights of freedom of expression and association? How do EU sanctions fit into, and compare to national systems for the proscription of terrorist organizations? Should the same legal safeguards be applicable both for "regime" sanctions and anti-terrorist sanctions?

When appointed to the Supreme Court in 1970 by President Nixon, Harry A. Blackmun was seen as a quiet, safe choice to complement the increasingly conservative Court of his boyhood friend, Warren Burger. No one anticipated his seminal opinion championing abortion rights in Roe v. Wade, the most controversial ruling of his generation, which became the battle cry of both supporters and critics of judicial power and made Blackmun a liberal icon.
Harry A. Blackmun: The Outsider Justice is Tinsley E. Yarbrough's penetrating account of one of the most outspoken and complicated figures on the Supreme Court. As a justice, Blackmun stood at the pinnacle of the American judiciary. Yet when he took his seat on the Court, Justice Blackmun felt "almost desperate," overwhelmed with feelings of self-doubt and inadequacy over the immense responsibilities before him. Blackmun had overcome humble roots to achieve a Harvard education, success as a Minneapolis lawyer and resident counsel to the prestigious Mayo Clinic, as well as a distinguished record on the Eighth Circuit federal appeals court. But growing up in a financially unstable home with a frequently unemployed father and an emotionally fragile mother left a permanent mark on the future justice. All his life, Harry Blackmun considered himself one of society's outsiders, someone who did not "belong."
Remarkably, though, that very self-image instilled in the justice, throughout his career, a deep empathy for society's most vulnerable outsiders--women faced with unwanted pregnancies, homosexuals subjected to archaic laws, and ultimately, death-row inmates. To those who saw his career as the constitutional odyssey of a conservative juristgradually transformed into a champion of the underdog, Blackmun had a ready answer: he had not changed; the Court and the issues before them changed. The justice's identification with the marginalized members of society arguably provides the overarching key to that consistency.
Thoroughly researched, engagingly written, Harry A. Blackmun: The Outsider Justice offers an in-depth, revelatory portrait of one of the most intriguing jurists ever to sit on the Supreme Court. Relying on in-depth archival material, in addition to numerous interviews with Blackmun's former clerks, Yarbrough here presents the definitive biography of the great justice, ultimately providing an illuminating window into the inner-workings of the modern Supreme Court.

This is the first book to provide an in-depth study of the juvenile transfer process. Criminal justice's get tough policy has led to greater use of this process which, on the surface, transfers persistent juvenile offenders to criminal court jurisdiction in order to impose more serious penalties. The implications of this growing phenomenon are increasingly important for both the juvenile and criminal court systems. Champion and Mays' analysis includes descriptions of juvenile courts, types of offenders processed by these courts, and characteristic outcomes of transfers. Examining the transfer process in detail, they explore social and legal definitions of delinquency; goals and functions of transfers; legal rights of juveniles; and the implications of possible penalties, such as the death penalty. Questions such as whether transfers necessarily result in harsher punishment are discussed at length. Transferring Juveniles to Criminal Courts is designed for students majoring in criminal justice, public administration, political science, sociology, and psychology.

Examining the transfer process, Chapter One provides a thorough discussion of the social and legal definitions of delinquency. Chapter Two is an overview of juvenile options, juvenile punishments, public policy, and the theme of deterring juvenile offenders. A description of transfers in different jurisdictions, including their goals and functions, is provided in Chapter Three. Chapter Four then explores the various implications of these transfers. Public policy is examined as it relates to the prevalent get tough policy. Chapter Five describes the criminal court and some of the varied functions served by these courts. Finally, Chapter Six summarizes several important trends relating to juvenile transfers. It includes male/female juvenile comparisons, the issue of selective certification, implications of prison overcrowding, and the emergence of a unified court system. An up-to-date bibliography is provided for further research.

"In this well-written and carefully documented book Professor Gottlieb contends that the conservative direction of this court is so strong that it is impossible for the poor and less fortunate to receive proper consideration and, ultimately, redress."
"--New York Law Journal"

We like to think of judges and justices as making decisions based on the facts and the law. But to what extent do jurists decide cases in accordance with their own preexisting philosophy of law, and what specific ideological assumptions account for their decisions?

Stephen E. Gottlieb adopts a unique perspective on the decision-making of Supreme Court justices, blending and re-characterizing traditional accounts of political philosophy in a way that plausibly explains many of the justices' voting patterns.

A seminal study of the Rehnquist Court, Morality Imposed illustrates how, in contrast to previous courts which took their mandate to be a move toward a freer and/or happier society, the current court evidences little concern for this goal, focusing instead on thinly veiled moral judgments. Delineating a fault line between liberal and conservative justices on the Rehnquist Court, Gottlieb suggests that conservative justices have rejected the basic principles that informed post-New Deal individual rights jurisprudence and have substituted their own conceptions of moral character for these fundamental principles.

Morality Imposed adds substantially to our understanding of the Supreme Court, its most recent cases, and the evolution of judicial philosophy in the U.S.