Comprehending life and death matters

Modern capital jurisprudence places special significance on judicial instructions to guide the discretion of the capital jury in reaching a penalty phase decision. Yet, previous social science research has raised doubts about the extent to which judicial instructions are generally understood by jurors and questioned their utility in producing intended effects. The present study measured the comprehension of the capital sentencing instruction employed in California. Data suggest widespread inability to define accurately the central concepts of aggravation and mitigation in use in virtually every state that currently has a death penalty statute, as well as the inability to distinguish properly the sentencing significance of the enumerated factors jurors are directed to use in reaching their life and death verdicts. In addition, an inordinate focus on the circumstances of the crime—to the exclusion of other potentially important factors—was identified, as well as special problems in comprehending the crucial concept of mitigation in constitutionally required ways.We would like to thank Suzanne Ban, Cori Nardello, and Maryanne Tagavilla for assistance in transcribing and content-analyzing the data.     

(Re)categorization as Resistance: Civil Society Mobilizations Around the Preah Vihear Temple

This paper deals with civil society mobilizations and resistance in relation to a world heritage site—the ninth-century Khmer temple Preah Vihear, which is located in the northern province of Cambodia and borders eastern Thailand. In particular, the paper explores resistance in terms of (re)categorizations from a historical and discursive–materialistic perspective. The field of resistance studies has mainly been preoccupied with entities such as texts, signs, symbols, identity, and language. In this article, however, we bring in physical and material entities in order to display the ways in which matter is of importance in the (re)construction of discourses and thereby for resistance.     

A comparison between the Intercept Oral Fluid Collection Device® and urinalysis among Baltimore City probationers

Few studies compared oral fluid (OF) analysis to laboratory urinalysis (UA) in real-world criminal justice environments, and no studies had collected survey data, from either specimen providers or specimen collectors, about the overall OF collection experience. In the most comprehensive toxicological comparison study conducted to date, urine and OF specimens were collected from a sample of 223 adult probationers in Baltimore City, Maryland, between March and May 2004. In addition, probationers and probation staff were surveyed about the OF collection experience. With confirmed UA as the reference standard, the Intercept Oral Specimen Collection Device® (Intercept) was 100 percent sensitive and 99 percent specific for benzodiazepines, 92 percent sensitive and 96 percent specific for cocaine, 77 percent sensitive and 96 percent specific for opiates, 39 percent sensitive and 98 percent specific for marijuana, and 75 percent sensitive and 91 percent specific for the detection of at least one drug. Seventy-two percent of the probationers and 88 percent of the probation staff rated the Intercept experience better than the collection of urine specimens. Implications for criminal justice policy and research are discussed.     

Clarifying Life and Death Matters: An Analysis of Instructional Comprehension and Penalty Phase Closing Arguments

We report the results of two studies designed as follow-ups to our earlier research on the comprehension of capital penalty instructions. In the first study we examine whether a California penalty instruction that was revised by the courts to improve its comprehension by jurors accomplishes this goal. In the second study we content-analyze a sample of attorney closing arguments that were given at the conclusion of actual capital penalty phases to explore whether they are likely to clarify those concepts and procedures that are so poorly comprehended in the judge's instructions. Results indicate that the revised instruction suffers from the same comprehension problems that plagued its predecessor and that attorney arguments appear unlikely to significantly reduce confusion among capital jurors.     

Controlling coalitions: Social lending at the multilateral development banks

Multilateral development banks (MDBs) dramatically increased social lending for health, education, and safety nets after 1985. Yet the great powers’ social policy preferences remained relatively static from 1980 to 2000. This contradicts the conventional view that powerful states control IOs. We argue that highly institutionalized IOs like MDBs require a complete model of possible member-state coalitions encompassing the preferences of all member states—not just major powers. We develop multiple measures of state preferences and include all member states in our coalitional model. We evaluate our model and alternatives with an analysis of more than 10,000 MDB loans from 1980 to 2000. We find that when we include all member states weighted by their voting shares, principal preferences are significantly related to lending outcomes.