‘You caught ’em!’…or not? Feedback affects investigators’ recollections of speech cues thought to signal honesty and deception

Purpose. When eyewitnesses to crime receive feedback about their choice of a suspect from a line‐up (or post‐identification feedback), such information can substantially alter their recollections of the witnessing experience. This study examined whether feedback exerts similar effects on investigators’ recollections of a suspect's behaviours. Methods. Participant‐investigators received training on speech cues that they were told, when present in a speaker's account, signal either honesty or deception. After hearing a suspect's account of a theft, participants decided whether the suspect was lying or telling the truth. One‐third of participants subsequently received immediate confirming feedback about their performance, while another third received disconfirming feedback. The remaining one‐third of participants did not receive feedback about their decision. Finally, participants rated the frequencies of speech cues that they had been instructed to detect in the suspect's account. Results. Disconfirming feedback significantly altered retrospective judgments about the characteristics of the suspect's account. Specifically, when told that the decision they made about the speaker's credibility was incorrect, participants judged the speaker as having exhibited fewer behaviours consistent with the credibility decision they had made, relative to those who either received no feedback or confirming feedback. Conclusions. Biases in recollections of a suspect may have consequences in real‐world interrogations wherein investigators assess credibility on the basis of numerous behavioural cues. Results are discussed in light of findings of post‐identification feedback studies on eyewitnesses.     

‘Factual causation’ and ‘scope of liability’: What's the difference?

According to a dominant view, for the negligent defendant to be held liable for the plaintiff's harm the plaintiff must establish first, that the breach was the ‘factual cause’ of the harm, and second, that the harm is within the ‘scope of liability’. On this view, factual causation is purely factual, while scope of liability is normative and non‐causal. This article accepts the basic two‐step approach, but argues that the distinction is overstated. A close analysis of the principles shows that factual causation may require value judgment, and that scope of liability often involves an assessment of the strength and nature of the causal connection between breach and harm.     

What Is “Law,” if “the Law” Is not Something that “Is”? A Modest Contribution to a Major Question

After proposing an alternative definition of what “law” (jurisprudential concept) is, this article demonstrates the impossibility of identifying “the law” (what law‐makers announce, relative to a particular jurisdiction) as something that is in a particular way. Rather, the law is a more or less abstract range of options. Drawing upon this conclusion, the article calls for a reassessment of how we view the role of law‐makers. We need to remove the mystery that surrounds the law so as to provide for greater transparency. This transparency can be gained by requiring law‐makers to declare their inescapable biases where they influence their lawmaking.     

‘Am I Free Now?’ Overseas Domestic Workers in Slavery

This article examines United Kingdom overseas domestic worker and diplomatic domestic worker visas in place since 2012. These visas tie workers to an employer by making it unlawful for them to change employer, even when seriously exploited or abused. The article presents the findings of a qualitative study of overseas domestic workers, exploring how this vulnerable and difficult (for researchers) to reach group experience these visas in practice. Workers reported instances of exploitation and abuse by the employers with whom they arrived in the United Kingdom. Having escaped, they have become undocumented, and are trapped in ongoing cycles of exploitation. The article assesses what light this empirical exploration sheds on the question of whether the visa is contrary to the prohibition of slavery, servitude, forced and compulsory labour in article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015.     

Human Rights in the Council of Europe and the EU: Towards ‘Individual’, ‘Constitutional’ or ‘Institutional’ Justice?

Abstract: The European Convention on Human Rights, promulgated by the Council of Europe in 1950, is widely regarded as the world's most successful experiment in the trans‐national judicial protection of human rights. The EU's much more recent judicial and political interest in human rights has also been widely welcomed. Yet, while the crisis currently afflicting the Convention system has not gone unnoticed, the same cannot equally be said of the difficulties presented by the increasing interpenetration of the two systems. Amongst the few who have shown some interest in these problems, the dominant view is that good will and common sense will provide adequate solutions. We disagree. Instead, we detect a gathering crisis which, unless properly analysed and effectively tackled, will only deepen as the EU's interest in human rights develops further. In our view, the problem is essentially conceptual and that, ultimately, it boils down to a much‐neglected question, simple to state but not so easy to answer: is the trans‐national protection of human rights in Europe a matter of ‘individual’, ‘constitutional’ or ‘institutional’ justice?     

‘Should I Stay or Should I Go ?’—A Critical Analysis of the Right to Withdraw from the EU

This article seeks to answer one of the key questions facing the EU in the future: what effect will the new right to withdraw have on the EU? Will it lead to a gradual fragmentation of what was supposed to be ‘an ever closer union of unlimited duration’? Or will it even mark the beginning of the end of the Union? In order to answer these complex questions, this article first briefly analyses the pre‐Lisbon situation regarding withdrawal. It then critically examines the newly inserted Article 50, which codifies the right to withdraw. Having done so, it will then examine whether non‐legal considerations, such as political and economic reasons, will render withdrawal a theoretical rather than realistic option.     

“Murder–Suicide” or “Murder–Accident”? Difficulties with the Analysis of Cases

Abstract: Homicide where a perpetrator is found dead adjacent to the victim usually represents murder–suicide. Two incidents are reported to demonstrate characteristic features in one, and alternative features in the other, that indicate differences in the manner of death. (i) A 37‐year‐old mother was found dead in a burnt out house with her two young sons in an adjacent bedroom. Deaths were due to incineration and inhalation of products of combustion. (ii) A 39‐year‐old woman was found stabbed to death in a burnt out house with her 39‐year‐old de facto partner deceased from the combined effects of incineration and inhalation of products of combustion. The first incident represented a typical murder–suicide, however, in the second incident, the perpetrator had tried to escape through a window and had then sought refuge in a bathroom under a running shower. Murder–accident rather than murder–suicide may therefore be a more accurate designation for such cases.     

The Spokesman Conundrum: “Is It Good for the Jews?”

Woest, Victoria Saker. 2012 . Henry Ford's War on the Jews and the Legal Battle Against Hate Speech . Battles concerning who legitimately speaks for minority groups pervade US history. The historically decentralized organization of American Jewry affords a prime example of this key leadership dilemma. Competing approaches to how to deal with Henry Ford's virulent anti‐Semitism and extensive hate speech in the 1920s underscore the familiar, yet seldom carefully analyzed, tension between confrontation and negotiation that is often faced by outside groups and their spokesmen who seek change, wish to defend themselves, and/or hope for increased inclusion.     

Dworkin and Phenomenology of the “Pre‐Legal”?

Ronald Dworkin states in his preface to “Law's Empire” (1986) that he is doing a phenomenology of law. In regards to a phenomenology of law, I wish to investigate Dworkin's theory of law, and subsequently, what is left out in order for it to be considered a phenomenological account. In doing so, I will compare Dworkin's phenomenology of law to Schütz's phenomenology of the social world. The comparison between the two will illuminate what I believe is necessary for law, and that is a Phenomenology of the Pre‐Legal.     

Rectification of the Register – Prospective or Retrospective?

In Gold Harp v MacLeod the Court of Appeal considered paragraph 8 of Schedule 4 of the Land Registration Act 2002 and interpreted this provision to mean that the priority between mistakenly de‐registered interests and registered interests can be altered following rectification. The court can give the de‐registered interest the priority which it ‘would have had’ but for the mistake. In other words, it allows for retrospective rectification. This case note concludes that this is the correct interpretation of paragraph 8 and of the words ‘for the future’. However, it argues that the current range of options available to the court in terms of rectification are producing uncertainty, and that a better approach may be to rely on the priority provisions in sections 28 and 29.     

The European Commission's Own ‘Preliminary Reference Procedure’ in Competition Cases?

This article considers the implications of the European Commission, as primary administrative enforcer of competition law in the Union, using its own ‘preliminary reference procedure’, through observations in national court proceedings under Council Regulation 1/2003, to minimise the risks of divergent application of EU anti‐trust rules under the decentralised system of enforcement ushered in by that Regulation. It sets the scene with the relationship between the European Commission and national courts in competition law, before describing the relevant provisions of the Regulation and its accompanying Courts Notice. It then discusses the legal nature of the Commission opinion as a Union instrument. Identifying cases where the Commission has offered observations, it assesses the implications of administrative intervention in judicial decision making. It finds that greater transparency is crucial for legitimacy, legal certainty and maximum impact on consistent application.     

“EXPERIENCE OF THE EXPECTED?” RACE AND ETHNICITY DIFFERENCES IN THE EFFECTS OF POLICE CONTACT ON YOUTH*

Proponents of police reform have called for changes in the way police interact with citizens, particularly with people of color. The rationale, in part, is that when people have more favorable perceptions of their police encounters, they view the police as more just and are more willing to cooperate and comply with the law. To assess whether perceptions of police‐initiated encounters shape law‐related outcomes, we examine how satisfaction with treatment during prior police contact affects procedural injustice, reporting intentions, norms supporting the use of violence, and delinquency. We also explore whether these relationships vary among Blacks, Whites, and Latinos. Our results indicate that youth who have been stopped or arrested fare worse than their counterparts with no police‐initiated contact; however, the potentially negative ramifications of these encounters on all outcomes except violence norms are generally mitigated when youth are satisfied with their treatment. The effects of contact are mostly invariant across racial/ethnic groups when a robust set of control variables are included. We conclude that changing the perceptions of youth regarding how they are treated by the police may mitigate some of the harms of being stopped or arrested, but we caution that these perceptions are shaped by factors aside from police behavior during encounters.     

Designing ETPIMs around ECHR Review or Normalisation of ‘Preventive’ Non‐Trial‐Based Executive Measures?

This article considers the transition in 2012 from control orders to more ECHR‐compliant ‘terrorism prevention and investigation measures’ under the Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011. It argues that the interaction between security and liberty over the post 9/11 years has the appearance of a dialogue between courts and the executive that has resulted in a diminution in the repressive character of non‐trial based preventive measures. But such an impression, it will be contended, is obscuring the recalibration of ECHR rights that has occurred, easing the path to the introduction of the enhanced version of TPIMs, under the Enhanced Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Bill. The proposed ETPIMs exhibit many of the objectionable features of control orders and are currently ready to introduce if the threat level rises.     

National Academy of Sciences “Standardization”: On What Terms?

The frequently cited 2009 National Academy of Sciences Report entitled “Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward” has become a focal point of forensic science practitioners' discussions and research since its publication. One of its recommendations is “Standardized Terminology and Reporting”. Little has been published to date on this topic, although conversations and dialogs on the subject are ongoing. The upshot of this communication is to draw attention to the problem of one term in particular, perimortem, which may be only the proverbial “tip of the iceberg” in the lexicon‐related concerns of forensic scientists. Even if it is an isolated issue, it is one that reflects the need for a consensus on term use and definitions by interdisciplinary practitioners who are currently using the term haphazardly, to the confusion of colleagues and potentially finders‐of‐fact in the courts.     

Falling into Line? The Hostile Environment and the Legend of the ‘Judges’ Revolt’

In 2012 the Government made a number of controversial changes to the Immigration Rules, which it claimed would ‘comprehensively reform the approach taken towards ECHR Article 8 in immigration cases’. This paper examines the judicial response, arguing that the courts ‘fell into line’, adapting human rights law to the government's aims through unprincipled and opportunistic techniques, whilst inflicting hardship and injustice on working-class British citizens in particular. Four key moves are identified. First, the courts created an ‘incapable’ test which immunised the rules from in principle challenges. Second, Lord Bingham's Article 8 test, in which the reasonableness of any family member relocation was a central consideration, was replaced with a far less family-friendly test. Third, the courts adopted an ultra-lax rationality test at common law, even when the ‘fundamental rights’ of British citizens were engaged. Finally, the courts identified immigration policy as the ‘constitutional responsibility’ of the executive.     

‘Inheritance Families of Choice’? Lawyers' Reflections on Gay and Lesbian Wills

This article presents the findings of research about the will‐writing practices of gays and lesbians. It develops a conversation between sociological literature about ‘families of choice’, which is silent about inheritance, and socio‐legal research about ‘inheritance families’, which is relatively silent about sexuality. It demonstrates how research with lawyers can contribute to thinking about inheritance and complement historical archives about personal life and sexuality. Focusing on funeral rites, partners, ex‐lovers, friendships, children and godchildren, and birth families, the findings reveal how gay men and lesbians have used wills to communicate kinship practices in ways that both converge with and differ from conventional testamentary practices. Examining the findings through the concepts of generationality, family display, connectedness, and ordinariness, and locating them within the recent history of social and legal changes, it complicates and troubles both anti‐normative and individualistic readings of the choices gay and lesbians make in constructing their ‘inheritance families’.