Truth and Justice, Inquiry and Advocacy, Science and Law

Abstract. There is tension between the adversarialism of the U.S. legal culture and the investigative procedures of the sciences, and between the law's concern for finality and the open‐ended fallibilism of science. A long history of attempts to domesticate scientific testimony by legal rules of admissibility has left federal judges with broad screening responsibilities; recent adaptations of adversarialism in the form of court‐appointed experts have been criticized as “inquisitorial,” even “undemocratic.” In exploring their benefits and disadvantages, it would make sense to look to the experience of other legal systems.     

Development and morphology of the sternal foramen

Bony defects (foramina) in the sternum were found in 6.7% of a large contemporary autopsy population. Usually solitary and located in the body of the sternum, these defects rarely occur multiply and in the manubrium. They have been found in children as young as 8 years as well as in persons of advanced age. Multiple mesosternal foramina and a manubrial foramen are described here for the first time. Sternal foramina form along lines of fusion of multiple centers of ossification and are the result of incomplete fusion. They have been misinterpreted as acquired lesions, usually gunshot wounds.     

The nature of the beneficiary's interest and the role of the personal representative in the administration and distribution of an estate

who at the time of writing this article was a part-time tutor at Cardiff Law School.     

Transformative state publics

Against the conventional assumption that publics, and particularly radical publics, are outside the state, this article explores their mutual combination and entanglement in order to consider how states might contribute to progressive politics. At the heart of this account is a concept of the state that incorporates the dissident and fleeting, and a conception of transformative publics based on four modalities: prefigurative, improper, liberatory, and unconditional. Transformative publics can be found within state formations; they also combine with them to produce new political governance relations. To develop this argument, the article focuses on two kinds of publics: those involving compelled state actors, such as school children and prisoners; and those, such as protest camps, taking shape through grass-roots political action.     

From papyrus to cyber: how technology has directed law enforcement policy and practice

Abstract

Cyber technology, both explicitly and implicitly, impacts every facet of local, state, national and international criminal justice operations. Unfortunately, technological changes, including cyber technologies, are rarely well thought out and may have unintended negative consequences. Additionally technology, and particularly cyber technology, evolves at a much faster pace than our understanding of the ethics, laws and policies involved. Consequently, citizens, criminals and justice professionals often rely on technology without the benefit of legal protections or explicit agency policy. This paper will examine how technology, both historically (non cyber) and contemporarily (cyber), has positively and negatively affected one aspect of the Criminal Justice enterprise – law enforcement.     

From public action to public administration: where does it lead?

Minnowbrook I and Minnowbrook II differ in one important way. Minnowbrook I involved mostly scholars who came to the field primarily through formal academic training. Several of those who participated in Minnowbrook II are products of comrnunity-based applied revisions of so-called new public administration in the 1960s. Radin served as a union employee and then a staff member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Cooper worked as a minister at several inner-city churches. Both Radin and Cooper took their doctorates later in their careers, after extensive street level experience. From this perspective they focus on the unique political setting of public administration, on the field's publicness, on the salience of theories of change, on a process perspective, and on “soft” research methodologies.

Through much of its history, the field of public administration in the United States has been punctuated by figures who moved from the arena of action to opportunities for reflection, either through writing or teaching or both. A review of the literature of the field up to the 1960s provides strong evidence of this pattern and is particularly illustrated by two important eras of public administration—the municipal reform period and the post-New Deal period.⁽¹⁾ The decade of he 1960s was one of the few periods of the twentieth century in which action was not the predominant pathway to concern about administrative issues. In contrast to this earlier pattern, the generation of public administration academics in the 1960s focused on writing and teaching as a goal unto itself, rather than as a way of searching for the meaning of action in which one was previously engaged.

Indeed, the original group of participants in the Minnowbrook conference came to the field of public administration through formal academic training; their quest for values, relevancy, and meaning developed as they looked out of the windows of the academy to the turbulent society of which they were a part.⁽²⁾

While some were on the inside looking out during the 1960s, others were attempting to define meaning and relevancy within the world of action rather than the world of the academy. This paper is an attempt to explore the influence of that action experience on the public administration field. The authors of this paper spent the 1960s engaged in a part of the social action that spawned the “new” public administration movement.

We believe that our involvements in the 1960s led to the development of perspectives on public administration which are somewhat different from those of individuals who were primarily involved in academe during those turbulent times. This paper begins with a short autobiographical account which provides the personal context for our perspectives. It then contrasts our views with those of the Minnowbrook group and focuses on those elements that make up our perspective on the field.