The Decision Not to Furl the Confederate Flag in My Classroom

Over the last year and a half, a number of scholars, pundits, and journalists have criticized college campuses for coddling students by constructing environments that protect them from offensive opinions and evidence that disconfirms their prior attitudes. In this article, I suggest two pedagogical techniques that can help students encounter and digest evidence that may go against their preconceived worldviews and opinions: teaching rational versus irrational thought and quantitative research design and critique. Guiding undergraduates through empirical studies on sensitive topics and encouraging them to critique their findings in a rational, academic manner can help ease them into more reasoned and less reactionary discourse about race, gender, religion, politics, and any other controversial topic in today’s contentious climate. I use my own experience teaching students research design in the months following a race-related murder to illustrate the effectiveness of this method in an extreme circumstance.     

论期待可能性理论与我匡刑事立法和司法

期待可能性理论对刑事立法的借鉴意义主要体现在刑事立法应当融入伦理价值判断，应当关注弱势群体方面。在具体的立法设置上，不宜在刑法总则中作出具体明确的规定，可以在分则中就一些具体问题作出规定。期待可能性理论在司法实务中的运用主要体现是，要求法官应当具备衡平观念，在案件的具体裁判中倾注道德判断。     

打捞海底沉没物的行为是否构成犯罪的法理分析及思考

打捞海底沉没物从行为方式上分析,在刑法规范的技术运用上具有无法克服的障碍。从法理角度分析,一种行为构成犯罪,往往具有二次性违法的特征。在行为能够通过民法或其他法规制约的时候。不应直接运用刑法作跳跃式的分析认定。     

论侦查人员出庭作证制度——以现行性侦查模式为视角

新刑事诉讼法首次有了侦查人员出庭作证的相关规定。由于新法条颁布的时间较短,这项制度尚属新鲜事物,没有相关的实践经验和司法解释予以细化作为该制度实施的参考。尤其是在现行侦查模式下,侦查人员出庭作证有重要的意义,但是实践中该制度仍然存在不足和亟待完善之处,因此有必要在理论上对存在的相关问题提出有针对性的完善建议。     

刑事审讯的程序违法性透析——以刑事错案的成因为视角

程序性违法是刑事错案产生的重要原因之一。刑事审讯作为公安机关侦查办案中获取犯罪嫌疑人言词证据的重要方法和手段，受到公安机关和办案人员的高度重视。在“口供至上”的刑事办案理念的影响下，为了获取侦查破案的所谓“关键”证据，办案人员在刑事审讯时不惜违反程序法的相关规定。通过对刑事错案成因的考察可知，在刑事审讯过程中，较为典型的程序违法行为有：讯问地点违法、超期羁押、自创程序、假借合法程序名义非法讯问等等。强化办案人员的程序法定理念、确保刑事审讯的程序合法是预防刑事错案的良策之一。     

Learning By Doing: The Long-Term Impact of Experiential Learning Programs on Student Success

Abstract

As the advisers for the Model United Nations and Judicial Internship programs at our university, we have witnessed first-hand the benefits of simulations and experiential learning. Specifically, students are able to apply knowledge from other classes to real-world situations, all while honing their writing skills and communication skills, as well as their ability to analyze and synthesize information—skills that are critical to success in a wide variety of careers. This practical experience also gives students confidence as they prepare for and make decisions about their future career paths. While we have anecdotal evidence suggesting that these programs contribute to student success, we use survey data from former students to assess formally the longer-term impact of participating in these programs. We find that experiential learning programs contribute to student success by improving time to graduation and increasing the likelihood of attending graduate school or law school and/or finding employment after graduation. In addition, the students’ own assessments indicate that these programs instill numerous practical skills and provide insights that help prepare students for success in their future careers.     

探求刑事证据规则的和谐

刑事证据规则从其适用的范围看,可分为原则性刑事证据规则与例外性刑事证据规则。原则性刑事证据规则重在保障人权,例外性刑事证据规则重在打击犯罪。刑事证据规则是否和谐,主要体现在能否恰当地处理原则性规则与例外性规则的关系上。和谐的刑事证据规则不仅有利于证据准确适用,而且有利于诉讼和谐和社会和谐。     

Teaching Students to Engage with Evidence: An Evaluation of Structured Writing and Classroom Discussion Strategies

In their transition to college, students often struggle to identify and make connections between the main arguments, evidence, and empirical findings of articles from academic journals commonly assigned on political science syllabi. Which active learning techniques are most effective for teaching students to recognize and evaluate social science evidence? To address this question, we conducted an experiment with students from two first-year writing seminars in political science. Students were randomly assigned to either an in-class writing activity or a group discussion, both of which required them to summarize an article’s use of evidence. We find limited evidence that group discussions are more effective for teaching students to engage with evidence.     

Testing the School‐to‐Prison Pipeline

The School‐to‐Prison Pipeline is a social phenomenon where students become formally involved with the criminal justice system as a result of school policies that use law enforcement, rather than discipline, to address behavioral problems. A potentially important part of the School‐to‐Prison Pipeline is the use of sworn School Resource Officers (SROs), but there is little research on the causal effect of hiring these officers on school crime or arrests. Using credibly exogenous variation in the use of SROs generated by federal hiring grants specifically to place law enforcement in schools, I find evidence that law enforcement agencies learn about more crimes in schools upon receipt of a grant, and are more likely to make arrests for those crimes. This primarily affects children under the age of 15. However, I also find evidence that SROs increase school safety, and help law enforcement agencies make arrests for drug crimes occurring on and off school grounds.     

以正当程序理念构建中国的刑事侦查制度

正当程序作为一条重要的法治理念和宪法性准则,正在逐步成为各国构建刑事诉讼程序过程中共同的价值取向。正当程序在美国被发扬光大,因此正当程序的理念渗透在英美国家刑事侦查程序的每一个环节中。最主要的体现是司法权对侦查权的制约、犯罪嫌疑人的沉默权及广泛的律师参与权等方面。考察我国有关刑事侦查程序的立法和执法实践,与正当程序的要求还有相当的差距。适当引入正当程序原则,对我国现行的刑事侦查制度的正当化改造有十分重要的现实意义。据此,完善侦查监督体系,强化犯罪嫌疑人的各项权利保障,实行逮捕和审前羁押相分离,以及建立非法证据的排除规则等方面,理应成为构建中国刑事侦查制度的主要内容。     

论刑法的有限性

所谓刑法的有限性,是指刑法的调控范围以及刑罚手段的运用是有限的,而不是无穷的。具体而言,刑法的有限性又可以体现在两个方面:一是刑法触角的有限性,二是刑罚发动的有限性。所谓刑法触角的有限性,又称刑法调控范围的有限制性,是指刑法调控的对象必须是在行为人意识支配下实施的严重危害社会的行为。刑罚发动的有限制性主要体现在三方面的条件上:第一,刑罚发动的首要条件就是必须有刑事案件的发生;第二,刑罚发动的实体法条件是刑法的规定性,该条件通常需要通过"罪刑法定的要求"和"犯罪构成要件的限制"两个方面来实现;第三,刑罚发动的程序性条件是指非经法定程序,不得剥夺任何人的生命与自由以及其他合法权益。     

背诵与多媒体技术在英语诗歌教学中的整合应用

在英语诗歌教学中，传统的背诵方法能内化诗歌情感、思想和语言，现代的多媒体技术信息容量大，节省时间，二者结合起来，既增加诗歌教学的趣味性和生动性，调动了参与的积极性．又培养了创造性，提高了人文素质。     

刑法案例教学评估体系实证研究

通过对华中科技大学、武汉大学、湖南大学3所大学法学院300份实地案例教学的问卷调查，对本科刑法案例教学评估体系在整个学校评估体系中的定位加以分析。然后对构建本科刑法案例教学评估体系的5个重要指标加以论述，指出应当根据刑法案例教学的特点和需要，适当地调整评估指标和权重，从而更好地促进和完善本科刑法案例教学工作。     

How important are the cognitive skills of teenagers in predicting subsequent earnings?

How important are teenagers' cognitive skills in predicting subsequent labor market success? Do cognitive skills pay off in the labor market only for students who go to college? Does college benefit only students who enter with strong basic skills? These questions are often parts of current policy debates about how to improve the earnings prospects for young Americans. This paper addresses these questions using two longitudinal data sets with earnings information from the mid‐1980s and early 1990s. It shows that the same evidence can be used to support the claim that cognitive skills are important determinants of subsequent earnings, and that the effect of cognitive skills is modest. It also shows that while some evidence indicates that college pays off more for students who enter with strong cognitive skills than for students who enter with weaker skills, the bulk of the evidence does not support this conclusion. © 2000 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.     

论非法证据的证据能力

非法证据的证据能力问题,涉及犯罪控制和人权保障、实体公正与程序正义的价值选择。对其证据能力的不同选择,直接关系到刑事诉讼目的的能否实现。在我国,对于非法证据的证据能力如何,理论界说法不一。从两大法系主要国家立法及实践,并结合我国立法现状及国情来看,非法证据排除规则的建立是我国诉讼民主化的必然要求。     

浅谈我国刑法中的“公理之情”

我国刑法中贯穿着"公理之情",这种"情"有助于我国刑法作用的充分发挥。理解"公理之情"的含义,在司法实践中运用好这种"情",有助于我国刑法任务和刑罚目的的实现,促进我国的法治建设。     

风险社会中刑事司法程序若干问题的思考

在风险社会中,科技发展也促进了犯罪形势的变化,刑法理论在某些方面已经作了一定改变。基于刑事一体化的考虑,刑事司法程序也应作出相应变化。“9·11”事件对传统刑事司法程序理念冲击很大,刑事程序中科技证据的运用和刑事公益诉讼的完善,应引起一定的关注。     

对我国共同犯罪理论与实践的探讨

世界各国刑法对共同犯罪有着不同的规定，现代刑法理论在此认识上也不尽一致，甚至在基本概念上都难以达成统一的共识，仍然处于见仁见智的状态，共同犯罪问题成为现代刑法理论的世界难题。我国刑法对共同犯罪有着独特的规定，共同犯罪人的种类也有别于其他国家，但存在着内在的矛盾。在着力于完成近代化历史重任以及谋求与国际社会接轨的今天，如何在保证理论完备的前提下，进一步完善刑事立法，成为我国刑法面临的重大课题。     

论辨认中的见证人

根据公安机关办理刑事案件程序的有关规定，辨认经过和结果需要见证人见证才能作为证据使用，但事实并非如此。依托刑事证据学的基本理论，考察国外有关辨认的法律规定，从确保侦查实践中搜集证据的真实、合法的具体使用方法等方面来看，我国刑事诉讼法中的辨认结果不需要见证人亦可作为证据使用。     

Regulation by generalization

Both criminal and regulatory laws have traditionally been skeptical of what Jeremy Bentham referred to as evidentiary offenses – the prohibition (or regulation) of some activity not because it is wrong, but because it probabilistically (but not universally) indicates that a real wrong has occurred. From Bentham to the present, courts and theorists have worried about this form of regulation, believing that certainly in the criminal law context, but even with respect to regulation, it is wrong to impose sanctions on a “Where there’s smoke there’s fire” theory of governmental intervention. Yet, although this kind punishment by proxy continues to be held in disrepute both in courts and in the published work, we argue that this distaste is unwarranted. Regulating – even through the criminal law – by regulating intrinsically innocent activities that probabilistically, but not inexorably, indicate not‐so‐innocent activities is no different from the vast number of other probabilistic elements that pervade the regulatory process. Once we recognize the frequency with which we accept probabilistic but not certain burdens of proof, probabilistic but not certain substantive rules, and probabilistic but not certain pieces of evidence, we can see that defining offenses and regulatory targets in terms of non‐wrongful behavior that is evidence of wrongful behavior is neither surprising nor inadvisable.