The origin and functioning of the family advocate system

This synoptic article focuses on the origin and functioning of the Office of the Family Advocate as the protector of the interests of minor children in divorce cases. Attention is paid to the general contemporary trend to specialise in judicial decision-making that developed out of an increasing need for expertise in the administration of justice. A number of arguments for and against judicial specialisation are addressed. The origin of the Office of the Family Advocate within the South African judicial system is discussed and a brief exposition of the history of divorce legislation in South Africa is given. This is followed by attention to the functioning of the Office of the Family Advocate with reference to the process followed in investigations of this office and points of criticism against the system are highlighted. The article closes with an indication of the need for research in this regard and possible focus points for future research are identified.     

Logical evaluation of evidence when a person is suspected of committing two separate offences.

We consider the problem of drawing inferences within a legal framework when a person is a suspect for two separate offences. Although we are primarily concerned with scientific evidence the issue inevitably arises as to how that evidence interacts with other, non-scientific evidence. We show that, in this particular context, the evidence can be conveniently classified into three categories that concern, respectively: the first crime only; the second crime only; and evidence that relates to similarities between the two crimes. Two case examples are considered and we consider DNA, fibres and eyewitness evidence. These are viewed from the perspective of a prosecutor who has to decide whether or not to charge a suspect with one or both crimes. Graphical sensivity analyses are presented which have features that are not intuitively obvious.     

Interjurisdictional Competition and Regulatory Advantage

As formal trade and investment barriers fall, government regulations– what once were domestic policy matters – becomeissues of international concern. International commerce createsthe potential for competition among regulatory jurisdictions.This article explains why there is variation in these regulatorytrends. Three general ‘trajectories’ are: (a) convergenceamong countries toward less stringent regulations in some cases,(b) convergence toward more stringent regulations in others,while in still other cases (c) differences persist among countries.I offer three (related) propositions which explain the differentregulatory trajectories: #1) Regulations on production processestend toward laxity; whereas product market-access regulationstend toward stringency. #2) Industrial structure affects thestrength of the process/market-access distinction. Powerfulfirms in concentrated markets facilitate collective action andregulatory capture. Dominant producers push for process andmarket-access regulations which reflect their interests, givingthem a competitive regulatory advantage in world markets. #3)The asset specificity of investments affects regulatory convergence.Low asset specificity leads to a competition-in-laxity; highmultinational asset specificity leads to convergence among jurisdictions(as firms seek to lower their transaction costs); and domesticasset specificity leads to differences among jurisdictions.Detailed case studies (on offshore banking, capital requirements,and infant formula) suggest the propositions are necessary tounderstand general outcomes, although not sufficient to fullyexplain individual cases.     

Al Capone and the Internal Revenue Service: State-sanctioned criminology of organized crime

The story of Al Capone's rise and fall as a Chicago gangster has always depended upon selective dissemination of federal agency records, particularly records of the Internal Revenue Service. Capone history, therefore, is state-sanctioned history. The IRS view of the Capone organization, and of the tax evasion conviction, cannot be easily challenged without access to the corpus of the IRS records. Unfortunately, these records remain sealed from public access, despite the fact that selective releases were made prior to 1977 to journalists, popular authors, film producers and historians. Continued secrecy over the Capone records perpetuates a state-sanctioned criminology of organized crime. Calder v. Internal Revenue Service ¹ attempted without success to unlock the corpus of IRS-Capone records to investigate the state-sanctioned view.     

Politics, culture, and political crime: Covariates of abortion clinic attacks in the United States

This study examined crime and violence against abortion clinics, testing elements of several theories that may help explain the variation of such attacks. The study theoretically and methodologically improved upon the prior research on abortion-related crime and violence. Theoretically, it investigated previously unexamined hypotheses from the social movement literature that may be relevant to this type of behavior. Methodologically, it used more careful measures for several variables, employed unique and heretofore ignored data bases, and examined hundreds of criminal acts across several types of crime (e.g., violence, vandalism, and harassment) directed at abortion clinics. Employing robust logistic regression and correcting for clustering of clinics by state, the study investigated the cross-sectional effects of state-level cultural and structural characteristics on anti-abortion crimes against clinics and staff. Results indicated that some crimes against clinics are more likely in areas where female empowerment is weaker, female victimization is more tolerated, and the anti-abortion movement has failed to reduce abortions.     

Differentiating among racial/ethnic groups and its implications for understanding juvenile justice decision making

Both theory and research have been refined to gain a better understanding of when race and ethnicity matter in justice proceedings. In the present research, this line of inquiry was continued by differentiating among minority youth to assess the extent being African American, Native American, and Asian American influenced juvenile justice decision making and how these effects compared to one another and Whites. Utilizing an interpretation of the symbolic threat thesis that emphasizes stereotyping, the authors anticipated Native Americans to be responded to more severely than African Americans, followed by Asian Americans who were anticipated to be responded to more like Whites. The results indicated partial support for these expectations.