A survey of the incidence of missing anterior teeth: potential value in bite mark analysis.

Bite mark analysis involves comparison of individual dental characteristics between a dentition and the bite injury. A bite mark injury may result from sexual assault, or physical assault, and defensive injuries, and as such can be used to link a suspect to a victim or vice versa. Missing teeth are one of the characteristics that could implicate or exclude a suspected biter. However frequency data for use by forensic odontologists can only be collated from epidemiological studies. Therefore an audit was undertaken of missing anterior teeth in adult patients (n = 1010) attending for treatment, gathering data that could be more relevant to odontology. One in five of the sample presented with missing teeth that were either replaced with a denture (11%), not replaced (6%) or missing with the gap closed (2%).     

Brexit,Fisheries and Scottish Devolution: An Intergovernmental Disruption

With the UK set to leave the EU, the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) will no longer apply and an alternative legislative framework will need to be put in place, simultaneously navigating the devolved settlement. However, aspects of fisheries management fall under the area of international negotiation which is reserved to the UK government. Disagreements between the UK and Scottish governments over where the line between devolved and reserved lies in this matter has led to difficulties in formulating a post‐Brexit fisheries framework. This dispute has exposed weaknesses in relations between the two governments.     

The Fall and Renewal of the Commission: Accountability, Contract and Administrative Organisation

The fall of the Santer Commission, prompted by the Report of the Committee of Independent Experts, sent shock waves throughout the entire Community. This article seeks to examine the nature of the problems which beset the Commission, to place these within the broader context of decision-making by public bodies, and to consider also the responsibilities of the Council and European Parliament for the delivery of agreed Community policies. The article analyses in detail the Reports of the Committee of Independent Experts, and the subsequent reforms initiated by the Prodi Commission, in order to assess the prospects for improved service delivery in the future.     

The Purse Strings and the Policy Process: Bureaucratic Shaping of Industry Policy Capacity after 1945

Much literature in public administration debates the role of the public servant in the policy-making process. Some literature acknowledges an integral role of the public servant in the process. However, this role often remains obscure, due to being couched in abstract terms. The hierarchical structuring of responsibilities and power within bureaucracies imparts the capacity for differential influence. This paper provides a case study of the role of the Public Service Board (power over staffing) and the Australian federal Treasury (power over the purse) in the shaping of the bureaucratic structure. The case study centres on the industry policy bureaucracy in the volatile decade after World War II. In shaping the bureaucratic capacity, the Board and the Treasury exerted a discretionary influence on the policy process itself.     

Felony voir dire

The practice of voir dire has a venerable history in the United States. However, despite numerous historical and legal discussions of the topic, and the increased participation of social scientists in the process, few empirical studies have been conducted on what actually occurs during voir dire. The lack of normative data is especially troublesome in the face of recent attacks on the process itself and numerous proposals to drastically limit or even prohibit what many regard as an important criminal justice safeguard—attorney-conducted voir dire in felony trials. This exploratory study attempts to provide some insight into the nature and content of felony voir dire. Our results—based on direct observation as well as juror interview responses—suggest that much of the criticism and calls for drastic reform may be misplaced.     

Duress and criminal responsibility

While the plea of duress is generally accepted as a defense against criminal prosecution, the reasons why it exonerates are subject to dispute and disagreement. Duress is not easily recognizable as either an excusing or justifying condition. Additionally, duress is generally not permitted as a defense against criminal homicide, though some American jurisdictions allow the defense in felony-murder cases. In this paper, I present an argument for how and why the presence of duress can defeat a finding of criminal responsibility. This is intended to establish the philosophical foundation for the legal acceptability of the duress defense, even though I conclude that the defense does not qualify as either an excuse or a justification. I also argue that the duress defense should be allowed in cases of homicide.