Search

Understanding more about the discharge of care orders is vital—whether a care order remains in place has significant implications for children and their families and for local authorities. While there has been comprehensive research about the process and outcomes of care proceedings, much less is known about the discharge of care orders—particularly how, why and when care orders are ended and the differences between applications that are granted and those that are not. The present study combined data from an anonymized administrative data on discharge applications, a detailed analysis of children's e‐records and qualitative interviews with family justice professionals to create the first detailed profile of discharge applications across England and Wales. This paper reports, for the first time, the number of discharge applications and outcomes across England and Wales, highlighting regional as well as between‐country variation. Drawing on data from children's e‐records and interviews with professionals, highlighting how and why local authorities are more likely to submit discharge applications, and to have applications granted, than parents. Recommendations are made for how to adapt professional practice and policy around discharge applications to better meet the needs of children and families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is the first paper to integrate plea bargaining with costly juror effort. Jurors care about achieving a correct verdict, but experience costs in processing trial-relevant information. There are no fully separating equilibria, where only innocent defendants go to trial, or pooling equilibria, where innocent defendants falsely plead guilty. The first result has been found in literature which does not incorporate costly juror attention, and is thus robust to the inclusion of this phenomenon. The second is new (barring schemes involving post-trial review by external bodies) and shows that laws restricting very lenient plea bargains are unnecessary; costly, unverifiable attention combined with the Cho–Kreps intuitive criterion rules such bargains out in equilibrium, regardless of prosecutor preferences. I characterize feasible semi-separating equilibria that a prosecutor can induce. I also characterize the optimum plea offer for different possible prosecutor preferences. There is a tradeoff between court costs, verdict accuracy and the length of plea sentences. The model generates novel testable implications, and helps to resolve a puzzle noted by legal scholars—that defendants going to trial overwhelmingly opt for jury trials over bench trials, while bench trials, in fact, have a higher rate of acquittal. I perform some robustness checks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In forty-nine states, the federal system, and the District of Columbia, individuals with a felony conviction are statutorily restricted from serving as jurors. Proponents of felon-juror exclusion justify the practice by suggesting that those with a felony criminal history lack character, and if allowed to serve, would 'taint' the appearance of the jury system. This study assesses that claim by measuring the public's opinion of juries that include a juror with a felony criminal history. Using a two-by-two vignette design and drawing on a sample of 200 participants, we vary two experimental factors: the presence of a felon-juror on the jury and the verdict rendered by the jury (guilty/not guilty). Results show that participants' views of 'illicit' juries do not differ statistically from homogeneous juries without a felon-juror, for either verdict condition, undermining the 'taint' argument. Results also suggest that under certain conditions, the inclusion of a felon-juror may bolster views of the jury and resulting verdicts. Adding to a growing literature on felon-juror exclusion, these findings call into question the character rationale for felon-juror exclusion and suggest that diversity of experience in the form of a criminal history does not undermine the appearance of the jury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractAs artificial intelligence (AI) judges are increasingly pervasive in decision-making, it is important to investigate candidates’ reactions to decisions made by human–AI hybrid juries. This study investigates candidates’ attribution of credit for success and blame for failure to the three agents in question: a human judge, an algorithmic judge, and the candidate oneself. An experiment with 3 (jury type: human-dominated, algorithm-dominated, vs. equally dominated) × 2 (decision outcome: positive vs. negative) between-subjects factorial design was conducted, with 346 valid responses. Our findings demonstrate a partial ingroup-serving attribution dependent on the outcome favorability and a significant effect of relative power status within the human–AI hybrid jury on grouping and attribution. This study reflects the fluidity of identity and self-categorization of human users when facing AI and other humans. We propose that people take a utility-oriented glance at AI in multi-agent decision-making situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a global public health issue that has grave physical and mental health consequences for millions of women. The judicial system plays a critical role in responding to IPV principally through the criminal justice system, family law, and/or child welfare jurisdictions. However, victims/survivors who interact with the legal system report negative experiences. An under-researched area of scholarship is the degree to which judicial actors understand the mental health impacts of IPV on victims/survivors and how they apply that knowledge in practice. This scoping review aimed to identify and synthesize existing scholarship on judicial actors' understanding of the mental health impacts of IPV on women survivors. We searched 10 databases (Medline, Scopus, PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Westlaw, HeinOnline, the Cochrane Library, and the Joanna Briggs Library databases) for studies published between 2000 and 2023. A total of 27 studies were included in the review. We identified five main themes, including: awareness of survivors' experiences, gap in judicial actors' knowledge, understanding of perpetrator tactics and risk factors, disclosing mental health problems, training, and guidance. The review highlights significant gaps in judicial actors' understanding of this issue and recommends strategies to increase the awareness and understanding of IPV among judicial actors. The findings can be used to justify future research to better understand the training and development needs of judicial actors to improve their level of awareness of the dynamics and impact of IPV and to make policy and practice recommendations to build the capacity of the judicial workforce. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Almost two-thirds of countries worldwide rely on laypersons as legal decision makers in criminal cases, and a substantial number use laypersons to resolve civil disputes. Laypersons participate as jurors, lay judges, lay magistrates, and members of lay courts. Their participation enhances fact-finding by incorporating community views and values into legal decision making. Lay participation can also increase the transparency and legitimacy of law and the courts and promote democracy. As a result, some countries have adopted lay participation in recent decades. Yet, concerns about competence and bias have led other countries to circumscribe or abolish their systems of lay participation. This review describes the different roles that laypersons play as legal decision makers and the work that they do. It also describes the competing trends to expand or limit lay participation in legal decision making. After summarizing the research evidence, this article concludes that there is much value in judgment by peers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Washington negligence law is a confusing labyrinth of foreseeability that not even Ariadne's string could guide plaintiffs out of. Foreseeability is implicated in four distinct analyses, several of which overlap considerably. Doctrines that were once questions of law are now questions of fact, and vice versa. Something needs to change. Washington has taken the novel approach of bifurcating the duty element into two parts--duty's mere existence, which is a question of law for the court to determine; and duty's scope, which is a question of fact handed off to the jury to determine. Foreseeability impacts both of these assessments, but to what extent remains a difficult question, despite numerous court clarifications over the years. Though seemingly simple on its face, contexts such as third-party and special-relationship liabilities complicate things. Exactly what level of foreseeability a plaintiff must allege remains largely an educated guess, and the law as it stands gives trial judges broad discretion to dismiss actions that seem outlandish, regardless of other considerations historically considered in negligence cases. If foreseeability were taken out of the duty inquiry and its existence and scope once more reunited, Washington could follow the growing number of jurisdictions adopting the Restatement (Third) of Torts approach. These steps would greatly clarify negligence in Washington and make the duty inquiry much more straightforward and predictable, allowing foreseeability to shine in considerations of breach and causation, where contemporary tort scholars suggest it belongs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Procedural justifications of democracy emphasize inclusiveness and respect and by doing so come into conflict with instrumental justifications that depend on voters' competence. This conflict raises questions about jury theorems and makes their standing in democratic theory contested. We show that a type of no-regret learning called meta-induction can help to satisfy the competence assumption without excluding voters or diverse opinion leaders on an a priori basis. Meta-induction assigns weights to opinion leaders based on their past predictive performance to determine the level of their inclusion in recommendations for voters. The weighting minimizes the difference between the performance of meta-induction and the best opinion leader in hindsight. The difference represents the regret of meta-induction whose minimization ensures that the recommendations are optimal in supporting voters' competence. Meta-induction has optimal truth-tracking properties that support voters' competence even if it is targeted by mis/disinformation and should be considered a tool for supporting democracy in hyper-plurality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Jury science is fraught with difficulty. Since legal and institutional hurdles render it all but impossible to study live criminal jury deliberation, researchers make use of various indirect methods to evaluate jury performance. However, each of these methods is open to methodological criticism and, strikingly, some of the highest‐profile jury research programmes in recent years have reached opposing conclusions. Uncertainty about jury performance is an obstacle for legal reform; ongoing debate about the 'justice gap' for complainants of sexual offences has rendered these problems acute. This article proposes a way to advance the debate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pittsburgh's Carnegie Institute was founded by the Scottish-born steel magnate Andrew Carnegie in 1895 and held the only annual art exhibitions in the United States open to artists from overseas. Prominent British artists Augustus John, Laura Knight, A. J. Munnings, and William Nicholson all served on the jury of award for the Carnegie's annual exhibitions in successive years, from 1921 to 1924. The bilateral relations between the United Kingdom and the US were sometimes strained during the 1920s. In comparison, the prominence of British art remained strong. While the influence of France in early twentieth century Anglo-American art has been well established, this article encourages an examination of the direct transatlantic links between the UK and the US. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Facilitated self‐management interventions have the potential to enhance resilience and well‐being. We examined whether resilience is a mediator of improving physical and psychological symptoms for people with systemic sclerosis (SSc) who participated in a 12‐week online peer‐led symptom management intervention. Methods: We conducted a secondary data analysis from a randomized control trial comparing a peer health‐coached intervention to a waitlist control. Participants completed the Connor‐Davidson Resilience Scale, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy‐Fatigue scale, and the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System measures of pain interference and depressive symptoms at the baseline and at weeks 6 and 12. Linear mixed effect regression models were used to assess the effect of intervention on changes in resilience. Causal mediation analyses were conducted to examine whether changes in resilience at week 12 mediated intervention effects on changes in fatigue, pain interference, and depressive symptoms at week 12. Results: One hundred and seventy‐three eligible participants were enrolled. Participants in the intervention group reported improvements in resilience (P < 0.001). These changes in resilience mediated the intervention effects on fatigue with indirect effect of −1.41 (95% confidence interval [CI] −2.41 to −0.41), pain interference of −0.86 (95% CI −1.65 to −0.08), and depressive symptoms of −1.99 (95% CI −3.16 to −0.81). Conclusion: For participants in the intervention who had positive improvements in their physical and psychological symptoms, increased resilience was a mechanism for these improvements. These findings support the importance of addressing resilience to improve symptoms in similar SSc interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using interpretative phenomenological analysis, this study explored how five public librarians in the United States experience and understand their library work with children and families experiencing homelessness. The participants described their deep commitment to providing services for families in homeless situations but also shared that they experience conflicting emotions about this work and feel unsupported by the profession and their individual libraries and coworkers. Even with their dedication and commitment, many of the participants expressed self-censoring judgments about their peers, the families they work with, and shelter staff members. This study situates the participants' experiences within a context of ambivalence around homelessness in library services and cultural narratives that render the homelessness of children and families invisible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inconsistent alibis often are viewed negatively, but they may be due to simple mistakes and not deception. The strength of alibi evidence also matters; alibis supported by strong corroborative physical evidence are more believable than alibis with no physical evidence. The timing at which the alibi is disclosed to the prosecution also can affect alibi believability. Two hundred and seventy online participants evaluated a consistent or inconsistent alibi that had corroborative physical evidence or not, and was disclosed early or late. Collapsing across the three conditions, more participants voted guilty than not guilty, and more believable alibis were associated with more not guilty verdicts. Consistent alibis were more believable, and the defendant was viewed more positively on five character traits than when the alibi was inconsistent. There were few effects of alibi timing. In sum, consistency led to positive views of alibis and defendants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To identify characteristics of malpractice litigations involving skull deformity in infants (craniosynostosis and deformational plagiocephaly). Design: Retrospective review of all lawsuits with jury verdicts or settlements involving infant skull deformity as the primary diagnosis using the Westlaw Legal Database. Setting: United States. Patients, Participants: Plaintiffs with skull deformity as the primary diagnosis. Main Outcome Measures: Litigation outcome and indemnity payment amount. Results: From 1990 to 2019, 9 cases involving infant skull deformity met our inclusion/exclusion criteria. Among these cases, 8 (88.9%) cases resulted in indemnity payments to plaintiffs, totaling $30,430,000. Failure to diagnose (n = 4, 44.4%) and surgical negligence (n = 3, 33.3%) were the most common reasons for litigations. Conclusions: There were a small number of malpractice lawsuits involving infant skull deformity over three decades. When cases go to court, physicians and hospitals have a high likelihood of judgment against them, frequently resulting in high indemnity payments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A report entitled Say Her Name: Resisting Police Brutality against Black Women underscores the paucity of research examining police violence toward Black women. This study focused on how valuing a White police officer and symbolic racism moderate reactions when the officer fatally shoots a Black or White woman during a traffic stop. At high levels of officer valuing, symbolic racism was positively associated with perceptions the victim presented a threat to the officer, but negatively associated with support for punishing the officer and perceived victim compliance; these associations were stronger when the victim was Black relative to White. At low officer valuing levels, there was no variability in the link between symbolic racism and the outcome variables as a function of victim race. Implications for bias in judicial outcomes for the victim and officer are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Issue Addressed: While the links between sun exposure and skin cancer are well known, the benefits of sun exposure, particularly as a source of vitamin D, are less well known. This paper reports on a deliberative study exploring public perspectives about sun exposure harms and benefits. Methods: Two citizens' juries were conducted in Brisbane and Adelaide to consider questions about sun exposure, vitamin D and health promotion. Members of the general population (jurors) listened to evidence from expert witnesses about the harms and benefits of sun exposure. Most witness sessions extended for 60 min, with 6 sessions over 2 days. At each citizens' jury, jurors were asked to listen to expert testimony, consider the evidence and make policy recommendations. The planning and design of the citizens' juries were informed by well‐established citizens' jury methods. Results: Jurors proposed that Australia needs improved public information about the harms and benefits of sun exposure. They argued for information that supports personal decision‐making that accounts for differences in skin tone and geographical region. Jurors agreed that Australia needs an updated sun safety campaign that reflects new research and addresses diversity. A one‐size‐fits‐all approach to sun protection may no longer be appropriate. Conclusions: While a new campaign should address both harms and benefits, jurors felt the need for skin cancer prevention outweighs the desirability of generating vitamin D through sun exposure. More nuanced public health messages are needed, which balance the need for skin protection and vitamin D, and acknowledge the diversity of Australia's population. So What?: Previous research studies are typically siloed into the separate areas of vitamin D or skin cancer research. This study incorporated both topics and pooled the views of participants in two citizens' juries who agreed on the need for improved information about the harms and benefits of sun exposure to reflect a modern Australian population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyzes the inadequacy of motions to suppress as a remedy for false confessions. Topics discussed include role of motions to suppress in the criminal legal system, role of he judge in the adjudication of motions to suppress, effects of false confessions on jury verdicts, and proposed changes to the criminal legal system to reduce false confessions presented as evidence in a criminal trial.

We document evidence that firms systematically increase specialized, locally targeted advertising following the firm being taken to trial in that given location, precisely following initiation of the suit. In particular, we use legal actions brought against publicly traded firms over the 20-year sample period that progress to trial between 1995 and 2014. In terms of magnitude, the increase is sizable: targeted local advertising increases by 23% (t = 4.37) following the suit. They focus their advertisement spikes specifically toward jury trials, and in fact specifically toward the most likely jury pool. Last, we document that these advertising spikes are associated with verdicts, increasing the probability of a favorable outcome. This paper was accepted by Tomasz Piskorski, finance. Funding: We gratefully acknowledge funding from the National Science Foundation [Grant SciSIP-1535813]. Supplemental Material: The data files and online appendix are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.4896. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 23 May 2024, the VI Tournament of Architectural Graphics “Line of Thought”, established by the Iakov Chernikhov International Foundation in 2018, was held within the framework of the XXIX International Exhibition of Architecture and Design ARCH MOSCOW. The aim of the Tournament is to support the art of hand-made graphics. The prize is a Silver Stylus.

This article constitutes the second material made from the free and empirical ethnographic analysis of several sessions of the jury, specifically regarding the idiosyncratic performance of its main characters: Judge, prosecutor, defender and Council of Judgment. It does not lend itself to the definitiveness of the selected theme, neither does it build undisputed thesis. It is based on eyewitness observation concept of jurisdictional plenary and it is designed to cast doubt on the unfailing concreteness of the jury as maintainer instrument of constitutional guarantees of a Law-based Democratic State to finally stimulate an academic dialogue on Human Rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do judges assess witness credibility? This question is particularly important in cases where child victims testify. These cases are usually of a sensitive nature (e.g., involving allegations of abuse) where there are no other testimonial or material evidence to corroborate the account of child victims. To better understand what actually happens when judges preside over trials about sexual interference, and how, in actual courtrooms, they use demeanour to assess the credibility of child victims, we conducted a qualitative thematic analysis of real courts judgements (n = 44). The results highlighted that when assessing credibility in actual courtrooms, judges make a variety of inferences from the demeanour of child victims who testify live, with striking differences (and similarities) when defendants are found not guilty than when they are found guilty. The results of our descriptive study also provided unique insights about (correct and incorrect) beliefs judges hold about child witnesses, and how, if children fail to display behaviour they are expected to display, or if they display behaviour they are not expected to display, child victims could face difficulties at several stages of the judicial process. We discuss the results based on the literature on nonverbal behaviour and child witnesses, explaining their scope for scholars and legal practitioners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Supreme Court opinions involving race and the jury invariably open with the Fourteenth Amendment, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, or landmark cases like Strauder v. West Virginia (1880). Legal scholars and historians unanimously report that free people of color did not serve as jurors, in either the North or South, until 1860. In fact, this Article shows that Black men served as jurors in antebellum America decades earlier than anyone has previously realized. While instances of early Black jury service were rare, campaigns insisting upon Black citizens' admission to the jury-box were not. From the late 1830s onward, Black activists across the country organized to abolish the all-white jury. They faced, and occasionally overcame, staunch resistance. This Article uses jury lists, court records, convention minutes, diaries, bills of sale, tax rolls, and other overlooked primary sources to recover these forgotten efforts, led by activists who understood the jury-box to be both a marker and maker of citizenship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• 150 mock jurors viewed bloodstain pattern analysis evidence. • Split into two groups, the test group also viewed a 3D flythrough of the scene. • The test group had significantly better knowledge retention. • There was no significant difference in emotion and confidence between the groups. There are numerous crime scene investigation applications of 3D scanning that have been previously documented. This paper documents the application of a 3D point cloud in the presentation of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis evidence to mock jurors. 150 mock jurors viewed a presentation of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis evidence from a murder trial in the UK. After viewing the evidence, the participants were tested on their knowledge of the evidence and repeated the test again 2 weeks later; to simulate criminal trial conditions; whereby there is a time lapse between the initial viewing of evidential material and deliberation. This paper found that the mock jurors who additionally viewed a 3D flythrough of a point cloud of the crime scene, better retained knowledge of the evidence over time, reported a greater ability to visualise the crime scene and had higher levels of interest in the evidence. Crucially, the 3D flythrough group did not report different levels of confidence in the accuracy of their memories of the evidence, nor different levels of emotional arousal to the group that viewed the evidence without the 3D presentation. Together, these findings suggest that 3D scanning of crime scenes, and the resultant point cloud's presentation to jurors, could add further value to the justice system when spatial information, such as Bloodstain Pattern Analysis evidence, is presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research indicates that auditors have an impoverished understanding of trial preparation factors that, independent of audit quality, can significantly elevate audit litigation risk. As the scholarly literature sheds little insight about the nature and implications of these factors, we identify what factors audit litigators consider in trial preparation, how they expect these factors to affect litigation outcomes, and how they attempt to leverage these factors. To do so, we interview 39 audit litigators, who identify factors germane to trial venues, jury pools, and case arguments. Guided by the elaboration likelihood model, we construct a framework that predicts these factors influence litigation outcomes by changing jurors' motivation and/or capability to elaborate. Importantly, we find that litigators who defend (sue) auditors strategically maneuver these factors to increase (decrease) the likelihood of higher juror elaboration, because higher elaboration is favorable to auditors. We discuss implications of our results for practice and research. JEL Classifications: K22; K40; K41; M4; M41; M42. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To support a diverse sample of Australians to make recommendations about the use of artificial intelligence (AI) technology in health care. Study design: Citizens' jury, deliberating the question: "Under which circumstances, if any, should artificial intelligence be used in Australian health systems to detect or diagnose disease?" Setting, participants: Thirty Australian adults recruited by Sortition Foundation using random invitation and stratified selection to reflect population proportions by gender, age, ancestry, highest level of education, and residential location (state/territory; urban, regional, rural). The jury process took 18 days (16 March – 2 April 2023): fifteen days online and three days face‐to‐face in Sydney, where the jurors, both in small groups and together, were informed about and discussed the question, and developed recommendations with reasons. Jurors received extensive information: a printed handbook, online documents, and recorded presentations by four expert speakers. Jurors asked questions and received answers from the experts during the online period of the process, and during the first day of the face‐to‐face meeting. Main outcome measures: Jury recommendations, with reasons. Results: The jurors recommended an overarching, independently governed charter and framework for health care AI. The other nine recommendation categories concerned balancing benefits and harms; fairness and bias; patients' rights and choices; clinical governance and training; technical governance and standards; data governance and use; open source software; AI evaluation and assessment; and education and communication. Conclusions: The deliberative process supported a nationally representative sample of citizens to construct recommendations about how AI in health care should be developed, used, and governed. Recommendations derived using such methods could guide clinicians, policy makers, AI researchers and developers, and health service users to develop approaches that ensure trustworthy and responsible use of this technology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Linguagens, Educação e Sociedade (LES) is the property of Revista Linguagens, Educacao e Sociedade (LES) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The perception of sound greatly impacts users' emotional states, expectations, affective relationships with products, and purchase decisions. Consequently, assessing the perceived quality of sounds through jury testing is crucial in product design. However, the subjective nature of jurors' responses may limit the accuracy and reliability of jury test outcomes. This research explores the utility of facial expression analysis in jury testing to enhance response reliability and mitigate subjectivity. Some quantitative indicators allow the research hypothesis to be validated, such as the correlation between jurors' emotional responses and valence values, the accuracy of jury tests, and the disparities between jurors' questionnaire responses and the emotions measured by FER (facial expression recognition). Specifically, analysis of attention levels during different statuses reveals a discernible decrease in attention levels, with 70 percent of jurors exhibiting reduced attention levels in the 'distracted' state and 62 percent in the 'heavy-eyed' state. On the other hand, regression analysis shows that the correlation between jurors' valence and their choices in the jury test increases when considering the data where the jurors are attentive. The correlation highlights the potential of facial expression analysis as a reliable tool for assessing juror engagement. The findings suggest that integrating facial expression recognition can enhance the accuracy of jury testing in product design by providing a more dependable assessment of user responses and deeper insights into participants' reactions to auditory stimuli. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Much ink has been spilled on the Roberts Court's approach to stare decisis and precedent. Such commentary is hardly surprising. In just the last five years, the Court has overruled extant precedents on issues that range from abortion and jury convictions to property rights and public unions. It has also substantially narrowed and limited existing precedents, curbing the reach of earlier decisions in ways that disrupt and distort the jurisprudential landscape. Some view the Court's uneven approach to precedent as ideologically determined. As these critics maintain, the Court adheres to precedents that are consistent with the views of its six-member conservative supermajority while jettisoning or narrowing those precedents that do not accord with those ideological priors. This Essay takes a different tack. Specifically, it argues for reading the Roberts Court's approach to precedent and stare decisis through the lens of remedy. That is, the Court's treatment of precedent might be understood, whether in whole or in part, as animated by a desire to rectify an earlier error or injustice. To be sure, this impulse is not merely corrective--the Court's approach to stare decisis goes beyond correcting what it views as jurisprudential errors. Instead, the Court's approach seems marked by an interest in identifying and righting a past wrong. Recent cases like Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, and Ramos v. Louisiana accord with this interpretive frame. In these cases, the Court departed from--or overruled--earlier decisions in part to remedy past racial injustices. Likewise, in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, the Court dismissed the extant precedent upholding the limited use of raceconscious admissions policies on the view that "[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.". Viewing the Roberts Court's approach to stare decisis through a remedial lens is clarifying. It helps us to understand--and better anticipate--the Court's treatment of earlier decisions. Understanding the Court's approach to stare decisis as a form of remedy renders more legible the Court's conception of legal injuries--and, in particular, racialized injuries. As this Essay explains, the Roberts Court's remedial approach to stare decisis is often deployed to correct what a majority of the Court views as a racial injustice. In some cases, like Ramos v. Louisiana, this remedial impulse focuses on correcting historic injustices wrought by white supremacy and historic acts of racism. But critically, a remedial lens may also render visible a reparative logic that unites a series of recent cases involving religious freedom, gun rights, and affirmative action. Although these cases focus on distinct doctrinal questions, they share a unifying impulse: the Court's apparent desire to remedy injuries done to Christian conservatives, workingclass whites, and, more generally, white people. In this regard, viewing the Court's decisions through a remedial lens may provide a more coherent account--across legal doctrines--of the Roberts Court's understanding of discrimination, the injuries it produces, and its apparent victims. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyzes how the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee incorrectly allowed rap lyrics evidence to prove the character of the accused in the case State v. Williams. Topics discussed include the Strong Nexus test of the direct connection between lyrics and the crime in question, stigmas and prejudicial effects of rap music when allowed into evidence, and potential of the Williams test under the Federal Rules of Evidence to create prejudicial bias in juries.

The article analyzes the contradiction between probable cause and presumption of innocence and how the right to fair trial of a criminal defendant relies on a child's education in fine arts. Topics discussed include history of probable cause and the Anglo-American presumption of innocence, impartial jury, standard of probable cause as inherently prejudicial, and jury's willing suspension of disbelief as a mandatory condition for the right to fair trial.

This paper examines the research by Fiona Leverick and demonstrates the methodological flaws in much of the 'rape myth' and mock jury research. Other ideas about rape myths and the 'justice gap' are explored and seen to be questionable. Furthermore, through a detailed examination of the rape myth acceptance scales, which Leverick describes as being 'scientifically validated', we trace the ideological and political-ethical nature of these scales and show a clear one-sidedness in how researchers have used them. Most particularly, we find that there is one-sidedness when it comes to the question of victim empathy. One result of this is that mock jury research has indicated that victim empathetic participants are finding individuals guilty of rape, despite the lack of evidence, and almost nothing has been said about the potential miscarriages of justice being demonstrated in these cases. The argument is thus made that rather than there being overwhelming evidence of rape myth prejudices amongst the public, there appears to be a one-sidedness amongst most rape myth researchers that is encouraging a sentiment of victim empathy that could distort the principles of justice regarding defendants being innocent until proven guilty based on a need to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. 1 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigate how the use of bullet comparison algorithms and demonstrative evidence may affect juror perceptions of reliability, credibility, and understanding of expert witnesses and presented evidence. The use of statistical methods in forensic science is motivated by a lack of scientific validity and error rate issues present in many forensic analysis methods. We explore what our study says about how this type of forensic evidence is perceived in the courtroom - where individuals unfamiliar with advanced statistical methods are asked to evaluate results in order to assess guilt. In the course of our initial study, we found that individuals overwhelmingly provided high Likert scale ratings in reliability, credibility, and scientificity regardless of experimental condition. This discovery of scale compression - where responses are limited to a few values on a larger scale, despite experimental manipulations - limits statistical modeling but provides opportunities for new experimental manipulations which may improve future studies in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 31 May 2021, a 14-year-old Black boy was racially abused, chased through the street by a white mob, and fatally stabbed in Birmingham, United Kingdom. Dea-John Reid's family and friends had the hope that the trial in 2022 would result in a racially aggravated murder conviction. However, a jury with no Black members dropped the racism charges, acquitted most of the defendants and convicted the main suspect of manslaughter. As this article shows, the 'Justice 4 Dea-John Reid' campaign's dark sousveillance challenged the jury's white innocence by publicly re-examining and re-narrating key CCTV evidence used in the trial through a critical Black gaze. Driven by the critical hope for a more inclusive and diverse justice system, the JFDJR campaign is proposing concrete steps to improve how suspected racism cases in the UK are handled. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Arte, Individuo y Sociedad is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This study investigated the impact of victim crying and gender on perceptions of rape cases. Participants (N = 240, 51.5% male, 48.1% female) completed a 2 (victim crying) × 2 (victim gender) × 2 (participant gender) between-participants design with case judgments (e.g., verdict) as the DVs. Results found that a rape victim crying during testimony increased pro-victim judgments compared to when the victim did not cry, that female mock jurors were more pro-victim than males, but that victim gender was insignificant. Finally, the mediation model found that victim crying increased their credibility, increasing the likelihood of a guilty verdict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Pedagogía Profesional is the property of Universidad de Ciencias Pedagogicas "Enrique Jose Varona" Facultad de Ciencias Tecnicas and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper explores the fact that linear opinion pooling can be represented as a Bayesian update on the opinions of others. It uses this fact to propose a new interpretation of the pooling weights. Relative to certain modelling assumptions the weights can be equated with the so-called truth-conduciveness known from the context of Condorcet's jury theorem. This suggests a novel way to elicit the weights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study aims to investigate the potential existence of a relationship between the development of fishermen's competencies in the western region of Algeria and the experience of obtaining certificates that recognize their professional expertise, following the fulfillment of the required conditions. The research employed a retrospective analysis to investigate how fishermen were assisted in presenting their experiences to the jury and its effect on skills development. Through a questionnaire administered to 100 certified fishermen, it was observed that adequate support was provided to effectively convey their expertise. This recognition of their experiences facilitated the development of new technical and interpersonal skills, enhancing their efficiency and the quality of their services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]