FACE Facts: Why Human Genetics Will Always Provoke Bioethics

Some people dispute the relative importance of issues in genetics and biotechnology for the future of bioethics, either because they think the problems are time-limited or because they give priority to issue of human rights and social justice in health care. In fact, the special historical standing of genetic issue s in bioethics reflects four overlapping sources of moral sensitivity which ar inherent in the stories that genetic science tells and raise paradigmatic justice concerns: the implications of new genetic knowledge for people's understanding of their familial roles, ancestral origins, community memberships, and ethnic affiliations. Beneath worries over "genetic privacy," "the therapeutic gap," and the "post-human," this constellation of basic wellspring which both insures and justifies a central place for genetics on the agenda of bioethics.     

Pre-Trial Defence Rights and the Fair Use of Eyewitness Identification Procedures

This paper sets out the normative basis of a claim to procedural rights concerning the fair use of eyewitness identification procedures. It is argued that there are two aspects to suspects' procedural rights. The first aims to secure an opportunity for the suspect to participate in procedures where doing so might result in exculpatory evidence (a participatory right). The second is the state's obligation to take reasonable measures to prevent wrongful conviction on the basis of mistaken identification by providing the suspect with a satisfactory degree of procedural accuracy (a protective right). This normative analysis provides the basis of a claim that Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides a suspect with similar rights. The final part of the paper considers whether domestic procedure is compatible with these putative rights, and whether it could be said to provide an effective remedy if they were to be breached.     

Knowledgeable Judges Make a Difference: Judicial Beliefs Affect Juvenile Court Transfer Decisions

This study examined how judicial knowledge and attitudes about transfer affects transfer decisions by juvenile court judges. Participants included 232 juvenile court judges from around the country who completed a vignette survey that presented a prototypical case involving a serious juvenile offender. Participants were asked to decide whether the juvenile should be transferred and to rate his rehabilitative potential. Judges who believed in the deterrent effects of transfer were more likely to recommend that the juvenile be transferred and to rate him as having lower rehabilitative potential. More experienced judges saw greater rehabilitative potential in the juvenile and were less likely to transfer him to the criminal court. Overall, judges tended to think that transfer lacked general and specific deterrent effects, endorsed rehabilitative over punitive goals in sentencing, and felt positively about the juvenile justice system's effectiveness in handling serious offenders. Yet, a sizable minority of judges felt otherwise. The implications of the findings for judicial education and legal advocacy are discussed.     

Effects of Court Officials on Sentence Severity: Do Judges Make a Difference?

The present article examines the effects on sentencing of a number of variables measuring court actors and their traits. Sentencing patterns were shown to vary substantially from judge to judge but the differences were found to be related more to the types of cases judges received than to sentencing styles of individual judges. Independent of traditional sociodemographic traits of offenders and legal variables, individual judges do not appear to sentence differently. Moreover, when we estimated equations which included judicial background characteristics, there were no discernible independent effects. These findings differ from both informed intuition and inferences one might draw from previous research. Consideration of subcultures of justice and cases on which court officials disagree about sentences may help explain differences between present and past research.     

Classifying Type of Child Maltreatment: Does the Source of Information Make a Difference?

To determine whether antecedents or consequences of maltreatment differ by type of maltreatment, researchers must address the question of how to classify type of maltreatment. However, maltreatment rarely occurs in the pure forms desirable for research. Children often experience multiple forms of maltreatment at one time or experience different types of maltreatment at different times. This paper examines six different methods for classifying type of maltreatment in a sample of cases reported to a state protective service agency. The greatest shifts in type of maltreatment group membership occurred when the definition was expanded from a single maltreatment report to include prior history of maltreatment for the study child and present and prior maltreatment for siblings. Multiple forms of maltreatment increased as more maltreatment history was taken into account. Regardless of the classification source, the most frequent multiple type was the combination of physical abuse and neglect.     

False Accounts: Why Do Company Statements Often Offer a True and Fair View of Virtual Reality

This article draws attention to the systematic and organised criminal acts committed by legitimate enterprises and professionals, focusing on accounting fraud. Firstly, the extent and consequences of false accounting are considered, then a theoretical framework is outlined which focuses on structural issues commonly found in financial scandals around the world. The Gokal/BCCI fraud is summarised as a case study offering insights into the motives and modi operandi of accounting frauds. The analysis centres on theoretical and practical lessons to be learned from this case, which is placed in the context of evidence from other frauds in Europe and the USA. The article points to the importance of strains and pressures perpetrators are subject to, the rationalisations they use, the organisational culture and anomie. The author concludes with an outline of the policy implications.     

从严治考热情服务认真做好第六次国家司法考试工作

目前,司法考试各项准备工作正在紧张、有序地进行,再有二十天左右的时间,第六次国家司法考试就要举行了。召开这次座谈会,就是请各省(区、市)司法厅(局)的负责同志,共同总结过去一年的工作,分析当前考试工作面临的形势,按照部党组的要求,统一思想认识,部署好、落实好今年的各项     

Paying a Price,Facing a Fine,Counting the Cost: The Differences that Make the Difference

In this paper I show that penalties are not prices, and explain why the difference matters. In section one, I set up the problem which the following two sections will solve: namely, that it is easy enough to make certain kinds of penalties look just like prices. In section two, I lay out and dismantle an argument for reducing the former to the latter; and in section three I dismantle an argument for taking penalties and prices to be pragmatically equivalent, on the grounds that the essential function of both is to attach costs to actions.     

外观设计专利的使用与制造的界限

一、据以论述的实际案例1 原告:江苏好孩子集团公司(下称好孩子公司)。 被告:江阴市精品商厦有限公司(下称精品商厦)。 被告:上海大阿福童车有限责任公司(下称大阿福公司)。 被告:上海福祥儿童用品有限公司(下称福祥     

我国污染物排放总量控制指标差异性公平配置理论及法律制度研究

公平合理的排污指标分配是污染物排放总量控制制度实施的前提和基础.实践中污染物排放总量控制指标分配很难做到绝对公平,实质上是一种相对公平,是体现区域差异、行业差异和企业差异的差异性公平配置.我国污染物排放总量指标分配管理,应当创新污染物排放总量控制指标差异性公平配置的基本法理并建立一套差异性公平配置制度,如完善污染物排放总量指标差异性公平配置模式、建立差异性公平配置体制、明确排污指标的权利属性、确定差异性公平分配原则、建立统一指标分配核算方法,并制定相应的技术规范,从而实现污染物排放总量控制指标差异性公平配置.     

Why Judicial Control of Price Terms in Consumer Contracts Might Not Always Be the Right Answer – Insights from Behavioural Law and Economics

Regulators everywhere are confronted with the question of how to react to contractual pricing structures that serve to hide rather than reveal the real cost of goods and services and thereby abuse limitations in the cognitive competences of consumers. Given that sellers/service providers systematically make use of insights from behavioural sciences to refine their manipulative pricing techniques, regulators should also integrate scientific findings on human decision making to correct behavioural market failures through more tailored policy choices. A holistic approach regarding similar problems is still missing in the EU and the issue is often disguised behind a discussion on unfair terms control, which does not serve the purpose of finding a lasting solution. The aim of this article is twofold: first, to show the weaknesses of an ex post judicial control of pricing techniques, and second, to discuss policy tools which could counterbalance consumer biases on which the techniques rely.