Civil procedure: Can the Scots learn from Woolf?

Conclusion So can the Scots learn from Woolf? The answer must be in the affirmative, for his review points up similar problems to those we encounter here. There is no room for complacency in the civil justice system in Scotland, particularly in the field of Information Technology, where court systems and expertise are sadly lacking. It is clear that there is a need for a system of case management in all civil courts, targeted in particular areas or on particular cases, but only after a rigorous reappraisal of court timetabling; and that the public will lose confidence in a civil justice system which does not meet their needs for speedy and affordable decisions, perhaps by turning their backs on it and seeking means of Alternative Dispute Resolution. As for written pleadings, perhaps the most that can be said is that the case for their complete abolition is “not proven”, but that thestatus quo should not be maintained is beyond reasonable doubt. Sheriff of Lothian and Borders at Edinburgh; Member, Sheriff Court Rules Council.     

IS AGE IMPORTANT? TESTING A GENERAL VERSUS A DEVELOPMENTAL THEORY OF ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR*

We tested competing hypotheses derived from Gottfredson and Hirschis (1990) general theory and Moffitt's (1993a) developmental theory of antisocial behavior. The developmental theory argues that different factors give rise to antisocial behavior at different points in the life course. In contrast, the general theory maintains that the factor underlying antisocial behavior (i.e., criminal propensity) is the same at all ages. To test these competing predictions, we used longitudinal data spanning from age 5 to age 18 for the male subjects in the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study. Using reports from three sources (parents, teachers, and the boys themselves), we estimated second-order confirmatory factor models of antisocial behavior. These models provided consistent support for the developmental theory, showing that separate latent factors underlie childhood and adolescent antisocial behavior. Moreover, we found that these childhood and adolescent factors related in ways predicted by Moffitt's developmental theory to four correlates of antisocial behavior: Childhood antisocial behavior was related more strongly than adolescent antisocial behavior to low verbal ability, by per activity, and negative/impulsive personality, whereas adolescent antisocial behavior was related more strongly than childhood antisocial behavior to peer delinquency. The two underlying latent factors also showed the predicted differential relations to later criminal convictions: Childhood antisocial behavior was significantly more strongly associated with convictions for violence, while adolescent antisocial behavior was significantly more strongly associated with convictions for nonviolent offenses.