Reports of sexual offences have increased in recent years, with many cases involving allegations against high-status individuals (e.g., Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby). In addition, many of these cases have involved allegations against the defendant from multiple victims, with long delays in reporting of the alleged assault. The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of defendant occupational status (low vs. high), defendant race (White, Black), number of allegations (one vs. five victims), and the length of reporting delay (5, 20, or 35 years) on mock-juror decision-making. Mock-jurors (N = 752) read a mock-trial transcript describing a sexual assault case. After reading the trial transcript, mock-jurors were asked to provide dichotomous and continuous guilt ratings, as well as ratings regarding their perceptions of the defendant and victim. Results revealed that mock-jurors rendered more guilty verdicts, assigned higher guilt ratings, and perceived the defendant less favorably and the victim more favorably, when the defendant was White (as opposed to Black) and when there were multiple allegations against the defendant. The current findings suggest that defendant race and the number of allegations are highly influential in the context of a sexual assault case.

Interested adults, such as parents and attorneys, may pose as safeguards against juveniles\' vulnerabilities during custodial interrogations; yet, the trial-level ramifications of their presence are unknown. The current research examined mock jurors\' perceptions and case decisions after they read about disputed juvenile confession evidence elicited in the presence of an interested adult.
We hypothesized that when reading about a voluntary confession (vs. coerced or none), participants would be more likely to convict, find the defendant vulnerable, and view his interrogation less negatively. When an interested adult (parent or attorney) was present, we anticipated an increase in convictions, lower vulnerability perceptions, and less negative views of the interrogation, and especially so when the adult encouraged the juvenile to speak.
Jury-eligible participants in Study 1 (N = 435) and Study 2 (N = 673) read a case about a 15-year-old male charged with murder and then completed a post case questionnaire. We manipulated confession type (coerced, voluntary, none) in both studies, interested adult\'s mere presence (parent, attorney, no adult) in Study 1, and adult advice (parent/attorney prompting the defendant to keep quiet or speak) in Study 2.
Overall, findings demonstrated higher conviction rates when there was a voluntary confession (vs. coerced or none). Study 1 revealed that a parent\'s or attorney\'s presence inflated conviction rates, and Study 2 demonstrated that adults\' advice did not affect convictions or perceptions.
Interested adults\' presence during juvenile interrogations seems to legitimize confession evidence instead of protecting juveniles at the trial level. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

The paper relates to the actual extent of the \"margin of appreciation\" of national law-making power in Europe when it takes ethical issues into consideration. This occurs when the use of technoscience may affect fundamental interests. The discretion of the legislature is limited, particularly by the transnational system arising from the European legal integration within both the European Union and the Council of Europe. The two schemes of integration, although there are differences between them, converge to put national legislation under pressure, particularly when it considers ethical matters. As a matter of fact, ethical issues cannot be approached at the national level alone but must be addressed at least at the continental level. An important role in the work of shaping the ethical rules from a continental perspective is played not by the national legislatures, but by the dialogue between the different levels of the judiciary. This role is inescapable and cannot be replaced by legislation, even if it is approved in a transnational plan. The function of the case law in regulating phenomena with ethical implications is studied, taking into consideration the case of Italian Law no. 40 of 2004 concerning medically assisted reproduction. Over the last 15 years, this law, which is inconsistent with many fundamental ethical principles, but has not been amended by the legislature, has been in the process of being corrected by the dialogue between European and national case law.

The role of experts and their presentation of testimony in insanity cases remain controversial. In order to decrease possible expert bias associated with this testimony, a number of different alternatives to adversarial presentation have been suggested. Two such alternatives are the use of court-appointed experts and the use of concurrent testimony (or \"hot-tubbing\"), in which opposing experts provide testimony concurrently and converse with each other directly. An experiment using a sample of venire jurors (n = 150) tested the effect of these alternatives. Results indicate that participants\' pre-existing attitudes towards the insanity defense had significant effects on their comprehension of expert testimony, their evaluations of the two opposing experts, and their eventual verdicts, over and above the presentation format (i.e., concurrent vs. traditional testimony) or the use of court-appointed experts (vs. traditional adversarial experts). When concurrent testimony was presented, defense-favoring experts were perceived by jurors as more credible than their traditional counterparts, though comprehension of the testimony did not increase; nor did the presentation format or the affiliation of the experts affect verdicts. The legal and policy implications of the incorporation of the hot-tubbing procedure to US courts are discussed.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of four pretrial jail release mechanisms (i.e., bond types) commonly used during the pretrial phase of the criminal justice process in terms of their ability to discriminate between defendants failing to appear in court (i.e., bond forfeiture). These include attorney bonds, cash bonds, commercial bail bonds, and release via a pretrial services agency.
METHODS: A multi-treatment propensity score matching protocol was employed to assess between-release-mechanism differences in the conditional probability of failure to appear/bond forfeiture. Data were culled from archival state justice records comprising all defendants booked into the Dallas County, Texas jail during 2008 (n = 29,416).
RESULTS: The results suggest that defendants released via commercial bail bonds were less likely to experience failure to appear leading to the bond forfeiture process compared to equivalent defendants released via cash, attorney, and pretrial services bonds. This finding held across different offense categories. The study frames these differences within a discussion encompassing procedural variation within and between each release mechanism, thereby setting the stage for further research and dialog regarding potential justice reform.

Technology and scientific advancements are accelerating changes in society at a pace that is challenging the abilities of government regulatory agencies and legal courts to understand the benefits and costs of these changes to humans, wildlife, and their environments. The social, economic, and political facets of concern, such as the potential effects of chemicals, complicate the preparation of regulatory standards and practices intended to safeguard the public. Court judges and attorneys and, in some cases, lay juries are tasked with interpreting the data and implications underlying these new advancements, often without the technical background necessary to understand complex subjects and subsequently make informed decisions. Here, we describe the scientific-quasi-judicial process adopted in Canada under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, which could serve as a model for resolving conflicts between regulatory agencies and the regulated community. An example and process and lessons learned from the first Board of Review, which was for decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5; CAS# 541-02-06), are provided. Notable among these lessons are: 1) the need to apply state-of-the-science insights into the regulatory process, 2) to encourage agencies to continuously review and update their assessment processes, criteria, and models, and 3) provide these processes in guidance documents that are transparent and available to all stakeholders and generally foster closer cooperation between regulators, the academic community, industry, and nongovernment organizations (NGOs). Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:572-579. © 2015 SETAC.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the use of cultural evidence toward an automatism defense, and whether such evidence would be detrimental or beneficial to a male versus a female defendant. U.S. participants ( N = 208), recruited via Amazon\'s Mechanical Turk, read a fictional spousal homicide case in which the defendant claimed to have blacked out during the crime. We manipulated the gender of the defendant and whether a culture-specific issue was claimed to have precipitated the defendant\'s blackout. ANOVAs revealed that cultural evidence positively affected perceived credibility for the female defendant, whereas there were no differences for the male defendant. Results also demonstrated that when cultural evidence was presented, the female defendant was seen as less in control of her actions than was the male defendant. Furthermore, lower credibility and higher perceived defendant control predicted harsher verdict decisions. This investigation may aid scholars in discussing concerns regarding a clash between multicultural and feminist objectives in the courtroom.

The purpose of this research study was to examine the experiences of prosecutors in Athens, Greece, as they implement a restorative justice (RJ; mediation) model in cases of intimate partner violence (IPV). Greece recently enacted a new legislation related to domestic violence, part of the requirement is mediation. This study used semi-structured interviews with 15 public prosecutors at the courts of first instance and three interviews with facilitators of mediation process. The findings indicate widespread role confusion. Prosecutors\' experiences, professional positions, and views of RJ in adult cases of gendered violence were shaped by their legal training. That is, their perceptions reflected their work in an adversarial system. Their views were complex yet ultimately unreceptive and their practices failed the victims of IPV. The study report concluded with recommendations for the legislators and for better preparation of court actors.

OBJECTIVE: to develop juridical recommendations in order to avoid midwifery medical liability when providing intrapartum care.
METHODS: case law of the past 40 years concerning midwifery medical negligence when assisting labour/delivery in a hospital was analysed. Databases used were Jura and Judit (Belgium), Legifrance, Juricaf and Dalloz (France) and Recht, Rechtspraak (The Netherlands). A minority of cases were retrieved through contacts with insurance companies (only Belgium), lawyers and courts.
METHODS: law suits in Belgium, France and The Netherlands.
RESULTS: the 100 analysed cases could be categorised into four types. The judicial assessment was focused on three domains of expertise of the midwife. Most cases involved interpreting fetal monitoring (47%), followed by recognising a specific pathology (32%) and responding to a complication (12%). A fourth type of case concerned exceeding the boundaries of the legal competencies of the midwife (9%).
CONCLUSIONS: not identifying fetal distress through fetal monitoring was the most common cause of midwifery liability (15/47), followed by not recognising the symptoms of a pathology (10/32), particularly placental abruption and uterine rupture. Also an inaccurate response to complications (3/12) and evidently exceeding the professional competencies involved midwifery liability.
CONCLUSIONS: achieving cardiotocograph interpretation skills is the first and most important recommendation. In pathologic cases, the midwife should immediately refer to an obstetrician, without any hesitation. The third recommendation is working in a team with the obstetrician. If the midwife has reasonable (evidence-based) doubts about the practice of the obstetrician, she should insist on re-assessment with respect to the boundaries of her competencies. The fourth recommendation concerns practising with knowledge of the client׳s/patient׳s medical record and updating the record with performances and observations. Consciously choosing the type of medical intervention in urgent cases of pathology is the final recommendation.