When prior knowledge and law collide

Jurors are supposed to rely on the judge's instructions for verdict selection. However, recent research indicates that people have constructed naive representations of crimes that conflict with the judge's instructions and that influence decision making. The present research explored potential solutions to this conflict. Two experiments revealed that the problem cannot be circumvented by avoiding people's prior knowledge; subjects activated and used their prior knowledge of crimes even when the crime name was withheld. Experiment 3 demonstrated that a supplementary instruction to disregard prior knowledge was also ineffective. Experiment 4 revealed that a supplementary instruction designed to revise subjects' existing representations did improve decision accuracy. These experiments indicate that the conflict between people's prior knowledge and the law cannot easily be avoided or disregarded, but its impact can be reduced by revising people's existing concepts.     

Jurors' Use of Hearsay Evidence: The Effects of Type and Timing of Instructions

To examine the effects of curative judicial instructions on jurors' perceptions of hearsay testimony, mock jurors (N = 180) were exposed to one of six versions of a trial that included proprosecution hearsay evidence accompanied by either disregard or limiting instructions, presented either immediately after the hearsay, at the end of the trial, or at both of these times. Also included were control conditions in which (1) the information was presented as nonhearsay (first-hand), (2) no hearsay was presented, or (3) the hearsay was presented without instructions. Results indicated that neither the hearsay nor the instructions, regardless of their form or timing, affected verdicts. In fact, findings revealed that participants may have disregarded the hearsay regardless of instructions heard. There was some evidence to suggest, however, that evaluations of other admissible evidence presented by the hearsay witness were negatively affected.     

Reason for Hope? The Spotted Owl Injunctions and Policy Change

Under what conditions can US courts contribute to policy change? This article shows how a case study can be used to test and develop a theory of judicial policy making answering this question. In The Hollow Hope (1991, 2008), Gerald Rosenberg theorizes that judicial policy making is constrained by the limited nature of constitutional rights, the lack of judicial independence, and the judiciary's inability to implement its rulings. Ninth Circuit injunctions protecting the Northern Spotted Owl and orders to manage ecosystems in the Pacific Northwest invalidate and help reformulate Rosenberg's theory. These rulings show how judicial interpretations of statutes, regulations, precedent, and facts allow judicial policy making if these interpretations are accepted by the legal and political culture when Congress and the presidency are too divided to override them. The owl rulings also show how statutes facilitate the implementation of judicial rulings, a point not developed by Rosenberg, while additionally providing further evidence for Rosenberg's specification of conditions allowing implementation.     

Educating Jurors about Forensic Evidence: Using an Expert Witness and Judicial Instructions to Mitigate the Impact of Invalid Forensic Science Testimony

Invalid expert witness testimony that overstated the precision and accuracy of forensic science procedures has been highlighted as a common factor in many wrongful conviction cases. This study assessed the ability of an opposing expert witness and judicial instructions to mitigate the impact of invalid forensic science testimony. Participants (N = 155) acted as mock jurors in a sexual assault trial that contained both invalid forensic testimony regarding hair comparison evidence, and countering testimony from either a defense expert witness or judicial instructions. Results showed that the defense expert witness was successful in educating jurors regarding limitations in the initial expert's conclusions, leading to a greater number of not-guilty verdicts. The judicial instructions were shown to have no impact on verdict decisions. These findings suggest that providing opposing expert witnesses may be an effective safeguard against invalid forensic testimony in criminal trials.     

U.S. v. Glatfelter and NCR Co. v. George A. Whiting Paper Co.: Seventh Circuit's Latest Interpretation of CERCLA Liabilities

Although a crucial part of the federal government's legal arsenal against polluters in environmental enforcement actions, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) is nevertheless an ambiguously and confusingly drafted statute requiring constant judicial interpretations of its application in litigation. Last year, several decisions delivered by the Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit have provided the latest interpretations, particularly further distinguishing between sections 107 and 113 claims, as well as clarifying apportionment and allocation of liabilities. This article discusses these decisions and tries to analyze their impact on future CERCLA litigations.     

Judicial Decision Making as Knowledge Work

Epstein, Lee, William Landes and Richard Posner. 2013 . The Behavior of Federal Judges: A Theoretical and Empirical Study of Rational Choice . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 440 pp. Cloth, $49.95. Posner, Richard. 2008 . How Judges Think . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 400 pp. Paper, $21.00. I review two recent studies of judicial behavior, Posner's How Judges Think (2008) and Epstein, Landes, and Posner's Behavior of Federal Judges (2013). Epstein, Landes, and Posner's volume, the empirically richer of the two books, builds on the conceptual model for explaining judicial behavior put forward in Posner's How Judges Think. I discuss this conceptual model and argue in outline for an alternative model, complementary in part and antagonistic in part to the behaviorist research agenda. Posner and Epstein, Landes, and Posner argue for viewing the judge as a rational actor in a labor market. I argue that analyzing judicial decisions from the perspective of the sociology of knowledge, without axiomatically assuming rationality, will allow us to bring more evidentiary sources to bear on the problem and will allow for a more adequate test of competing theoretical interpretations. Law and society scholars are well positioned to contribute to this line of inquiry.     

1952年司法改革运动与法学界的反思——以北京市旧司法人员清理与改造为视角

1952年至1953年的司法改革运动是新中国成立后第一次司法改革,其理念与制度产物仍影响着现今司法体制的建构.司法改革运动的一条隐形动因是破解"案多人少",重塑审判工作模式,为新中国司法制度提供"人民属性"的法理诠释,并尝试建设"政治维度"、"人民维度"和"法律维度"和谐共生的新型司法制度.1957年整风期间,法学界对司法改革运动进行了反思与批判,但囿于意识形态干扰,最终酿成"反击右倾扩大化",导致"案多人少"的矛盾更加突出,司法制度全面倾斜"政治维度",进而演变成为新中国法制建设的灾难.     

A Faction of One: Revisiting Madison's Notes on the Constitutional Convention

This essay on Madison's Hand: Revising the Constitutional Convention, Mary Bilder's revisionist account (2016) of James Madison's Notes on the Constitutional Convention argues that her central thesis, which is that Madison substantially revised the Notes long after the Convention adjourned, is groundbreaking but will have no effect on constitutional law. Madison's Hand is groundbreaking because the book yields many powerful insights into the deliberations of the Convention and into the evolution of Madison's thought. Nevertheless, constitutional practice in the Supreme Court and among elite lawyers is so divorced from the Notes that even a dramatic shift in their interpretation will not disturb the evolution of judicial doctrine applying the text written in 1787.     

最高人民法院裁判、司法解释的法律地位

The decisions and the legislative interpretations of judicial interpretations of the Supreme Court of China can be considered as a part of Mainland China’s customary law, and carried by decisions and judicial interpretations. Customary law is the very source of its normal force and they are supposed to be an informal source of the law for they have the required characteristics for substantiating customary law. Accordingly, the legislative judicial interpretations and decisions of the Supreme Court that are qualified to be promulgated in the Gazette of the Supreme Court should be standardized by the requisites of customary law and have the quality supposed to be universally fair. Cao Shibing is a senior judge of the Supreme Court of China majoring in civil law, and he was awarded the doctorate of law by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Till now, he has published an amount of academic works, for instance, On Anti-monopoly Law (1996), Resolve of the Problems in the Suretyship Law of China and its Prospect (2001), On Insolvency Law of China (2003), and his translated book in Chinese (1998) —The Death of Contract (originally written by Grant Gilmore in 1995).     

Privative clauses in special education legislative schemes: are they constitutional under the Canadian Charter?

This paper suggests that privative clauses in the enabling statutes (Education Acts) governing provincially appointed special education appeal tribunals (SET) are unconstitutional under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is suggested that ‘final and binding’ SET decisions about children's designation as special needs and their educational placement infringe upon the Charter rights of both parent and exceptional child. The standard for judicial review of SET decisions, given a privative clause, is whether the decision is ‘patently unreasonable’ while ‘correctness’, according to case law, is the appropriate standard when finally determining fundamental rights. Parents of exceptional children in practice have recourse to the courts regarding only procedural rather than substantive issues regarding SET decisions due to the high deference the courts afford any administrat ive tribunal protected by a privative clause. The very high judicial review standard of ‘patently unreasonable’ rather than ‘correctness’ is not consistent, furthermore, with the child's ‘best interests’ or in meeting international obligations to disabled children under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.     

Mental reinstatement of context with child witnesses: does it matter whether context is reinstated ‘out loud’?

Abstract

In this study we examined the impact of two types of mental reinstatement of context instructions in facilitating children's recall of a staged event across two stages of development. Specifically, a 2 × 3 factorial design was utilised incorporating two age groups (6- and 12-year-olds) and three interview conditions (standard recall, mental reinstatement where the child was instructed to reinstate the context ‘out loud’, and mental reinstatement without the explicit ‘out loud’ instruction). Overall, mental reinstatement instruction led to more correct and fewer incorrect responses than the standard recall instruction. The effect of mental reinstatement was similar across the age groups and irrespective of whether the child was asked to reinstate ‘out loud’. Beneficial effects of the technique, however, were only evident for cued-recall questions as opposed to free-narrative responses. The implications of these findings and directions for future research are discussed.     

四级两审制的发生和演化

司法体制改革的一个重要举措是设立最高人民法院巡回法庭,这一改革举措可能意味着我国法院层级或审级变化的新动向.从建国以来的历史经验看,法院层级和审级变化并非彼此孤立,且都从属于国家政治形态设计.1954年中共中央取消大区分院,促动了法院审级由三审制改为两审制.两审制带来的法院功能和案负变化,导致中级人民法院层级的设立.为了保障四级两审制平滑运作,民事调解制度扩大,基层法院派出法庭普遍设立.这一法院层级和审级制度的设立,契合了扩大省级地方权力的政治目标.1983年以来“地改市”运动、民事调解制度的萎缩以及撤销部分派出法庭,使得四级两审制的基础发生松动,法院层级和审级方面的新变化由此产生.     

检察官相对独立论

法学界一般认为,"人民检察院依照法律规定独立行使检察权"中的"独立"是指检察院作为整体的独立,而非检察官独立.但实际上,检察官相对独立具有检察制度内在的必然性和现实的必要性:它是检察院整体独立的基础,是"检察一体"的前提和防止"检察一体"弊端的重要措施,是检察官法律地位、活动原则、司法规律和深化司法体制改革的必然要求.检察官相对独立是依法独立,是党的领导、人大监督和"检察一体"下的独立,是"独立"与"受制"的有机统一.     

人民法庭地位与功能的重构

近十余年来,在法院现代化、正规化、规范化建设过程中,人民法庭的角色在一定程度上被边缘化。然而,我国基层社会纠纷的有效解决正逐步凸显出对人民法庭功能的需求,人民法庭自身的条件也发生了重要变化。在新的历史条件下,应当重新审视人民法庭的地位与功能,把适当增加人民法庭的设置,合理调整人民法庭的区域布局,充实人民法庭的审判力量,强化人民法庭的功能,作为我国基层法院当下发展与改革的重要内容和路径。这既可以从S省P县法院相关实践中部分得到证明,更可以从司法辖域的相对限缩、人民法院发展的主导思路以及基层法院审判工作主要特性等三个维度得到理论阐释。     

Reforming the Criminal Evidence System in China

Since 1997, China has proposed to reform the judicial system. In 2007, China officially set its goal of judicial reform as to “establish a Socialist Judicial System with fairness, efficiency and authority”. Now that the goal of judicial reform has been firmly established, the key question is how to accomplish that goal. One view advocates achieving judicial reform through administrative measures. A different path, which we proposed, is to accomplish the goal of judicial reform through reinforcing the construction of evidence system. Through analyzing the current law and investigating some judicial cases, the study found that the main reason for issues of judicial unfairness and corruption in current China is due to neglect of the construction of evidence system, and the current evidence rules contain too many problems, and the aforementioned problems have become a bottleneck for China's judicial reform and an important reason for China to reconstruct the whole evidence system. Therefore, in the long run, it would be ideal for legislature to promulgate a unified code of evidence law, but it is an extremely difficult task to coordinate the relationship between evidence law and three major procedural laws. In the short term, the most feasible compromise is to have the Supreme People's Court promulgate People's Court provisions on Evidence. After repeated test through the trials, we believe that such a unified People's Court provisions on Evidence will dramatically improve the evidence system and promote judicial fairness and the reform of legal education in China.     

Getting to the Point: Attempting to Improve Juror Comprehension of Capital Penalty Phase Instructions

This research examined the effects of several versions of capital penalty phase instructions on juror comprehension. Study One documented the impact of California’s recently implemented “plain language” instruction. It showed that although the new instruction has clear advantages over the previous version, significant comprehension problems remain. Study Two evaluated several modified instructions designed to enhance comprehension. Participants heard either a standard patterned instruction or one of two alternatives—a psycholinguistically improved instruction, or a “pinpoint” instruction using case-related facts to illustrate key terms—in a simulated death penalty sentencing phase. Persons who heard modified instructions demonstrated higher levels of comprehension on virtually every measure as compared to those in the standard instruction condition.     

Perceptions of coercion in interrogation: comparing expert and lay opinions

ABSTRACT

When confessions are entered into evidence in criminal courts, issues of coercion and voluntariness are important and often contested matters. Occasionally, defense attorneys proffer expert witnesses to testify about the coercive pressures of an interrogation and the risk of a false confession. Such testimony is often ruled inadmissible on the grounds that it does not inform the jury beyond its common knowledge. In our effort to test this judicial assumption about common knowledge, we surveyed jury-eligible laypeople (n?=?67) and social scientists specializing in interrogation and confessions (n?=?54) regarding their opinions about the coerciveness of prohibited interrogation tactics, maximization techniques, minimization techniques, and suspect risk factors and compared their ratings with a set of independent t tests. Laypeople gave lower ratings to the coerciveness of all sets of items representing interrogation techniques, and lower ratings to the vulnerabilities associated with suspect risk factors, as compared to social science experts. The disparities between laypeople’s and experts’ perceptions of coercion in interrogations demonstrate that such issues are not fully within the common knowledge of prospective jurors, and suggest the need to provide jurors with expert witness guidance when tasked with evaluating confession evidence.     

Social Influence in Eyewitness Recall: A Meta-Analytic Review of Lineup Instruction Effects

Past research has considered the impact of biased police lineup instructions upon eyewitness lineup performance. Biased instructions either suggest to the eyewitness that the perpetrator is in the lineup or otherwise discourage a no choice response. A meta-analysis of 18 studies was employed to review the hypothesis that biased instructions lead to greater willingness to choose and less accurate lineup identifications than do unbiased instructions. The role of moderating variables in the instruction procedure was also considered. In support of the hypothesis, a significantly higher level of choosing followed biased instructions. Lineup type moderated performance accuracy, however. For target-absent lineups the increased level of choosing following biased instructions resulted in reduced identification accuracy. Biased instructions within a target-present lineup generated a higher level of confidence, but had minimal impact on accuracy. Implications for police practice are discussed.     

Judge-versus attorney-conducted voir dire

Broeder (1965) found that potential jurors frequently distort their replies to questions posed during the voir dire. Considerable controversy has arisen over whether more honest, accurate information is elecited by a judge or by an attorney. The experiment manipulated two target (judge-versus attorney-conducted voir dire) and two interpersonal style variables (personal versus formal). The dependent measure was the consistency of subjects' attitude reports given at pretest and again verbally in court. One-hundred-and-sixteen jury-eligible community residents participated. The results provide support for the hypothesis that attorneys are more effective than judges in eliciting candid self-disclosure from potential jurors. Subjects changed their answers almost twice as much when questioned by a judge as when interviewed by an attorney. It was suggested that the judge's presence evokes considerable pressure toward conformity to a set of perceived judicial standards among jurors, which is minimized during an attorney voir dire.