The Good Lives Model – new directions for preventative practice with children?

The study of young offenders has tended to focus on adolescents, despite knowledge that those who are engaging in criminality during childhood are more likely to experience long-lasting, life-impairing consequences. This qualitative study investigated how child offenders experience the process of desisting from crime. It was hoped that this would provide further insight for those involved with prevention programmes for young offenders. Seven young people aged between 10 and 18, engaging with the Preventing Youth Offending Project (PYOP) in the UK were interviewed, and the data collected was subject to Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Four themes emerged from the narratives, all converging on a changed self-identity for those successfully desisting. PYOP aims to enhance the lives of young people, and this approach appears to encourage this identity transformation through the provision of purposeful activity, supported education and mentoring. The increasing popularity of strengths-based enhancement approaches to rehabilitation, such as the Good Lives Model (GLM), is discussed in relation to its potential role in the prevention of criminality in young people. It is proposed that the GLM principles could provide essential foundations for early intervention approaches as well as rehabilitative measures for established offenders.     

国际货物销售风险转移问题探讨

国际货物销售法中的“风险”是指由于自然灾害、意外事故或销售合同当事人以外的原因造成的卖方交付的货物遭受损坏、灭失的风险。关于风险转移的法律制度表明了特定交易条件下风险自卖方转移至买方的准确的时间和地点 ,使我们能通过确定货物损失原因、性质 ,决定由哪一方承担风险损失责任。《联合国国际货物销售合同公约》关于风险转移的基本原则是当事人可以通过引用诸如Incoterms中的贸易术语在销售合同中规定风险转移界限 ,公约还提出 5种补充性的风险转移模式。公约还规定了卖方违约时仍应承担风险事故造成的货物损失责任     

Participation in Laboratory Research Result in Emotional Distress with One’s Partner: Comparing Violent and Nonviolent Couples

The present study compared impact of participating in laboratory research assessments on couples experiencing partner violence and nonviolent couples. Across two studies, 192 couples participated in a variety of potentially distressing laboratory procedures, including discussing relationship problems, viewing videotapes of their discussions, and completing questionnaires about personal and relationship problems. At the end of each laboratory session, participants rated their emotions about their partners as a result of having participated in the study procedures. Couples, recruited from the community, were placed into one of three groups: experiencing violence (V), nonviolent but maritally distressed (NVD), and nonviolent and nondistressed (NVND). Overall, study participants did not report high levels of negative feelings toward their spouses at the end of lab sessions. Few differences between V and NVD spouses were statistically significant, suggesting that violent spouses are not at greater risk than NVD spouses for negative feelings following study participation, although the finding of greater fear among V partners in one study deserves future attention. Relative to V and NVD couples, happy couples reported more positive and fewer negative feelings; NVD wives were the most likely to report negative emotions, in sessions involving a marital problem discussion. These findings can be used in discussions with Institutional Review Boards about the potential risks of laboratory procedures for violent couples recruited from the community.

数字时代司法责任伦理之守正

在数字化浪潮下,司法活动呈现出去责任化的趋势,具体表现为责任感的缺失和责任推诿的加剧,因而亟待法学界对司法责任伦理予以革新。数字技术导致司法责任消解的机理是复杂和多元的,主要源于其兼具权威性与非权威性、确定性与不确定性、机械性与能动性等多重面孔。当前我国司法工作中的数字技术主要被应用于证据指引系统、风险评估工具、在线诉讼平台的开发等事项上,这些领域也是司法责任伦理冲突最为激烈的场域。数字时代应当坚守人本主义司法责任伦理,准确界定机器、技术人员、系统部署者与司法官的责任框架,在拥抱技术的同时树立科学的责任观,借助数字技术建立和完善符合时代特征的司法责任体系。     

比较法视野中的刑事证明方法与程序

诉讼主要与证明有关,从证明方法的类型及其合理性来解释和评价程序的制度与实践,应该是刑事程序法律比较的一个不可或缺、但未受足够重视的重要视角。从比较法的角度来看,一方面,不同的程序法规范决定了在认识论上区分的证明方法模式的合法性差异,而司法的现实需要和不同的宏观司法制度语境又会使证明方法的法律规范模式产生变异和分化的司法实践形态;另一方面,诉讼程序的法律规定和实践的许多差异,在很大程度上是证明方法的规范模式和实践形态的不同知识特征所产生的程序效应。这种研究可以纠偏关于程序原理的一些流行观念,树立一种工具理性的程序观,给中国刑事程序的法治化改革带来一些新的启示。