Is the Expert Admissibility Game Fixed?: Judicial Gatekeeping of Fire and Arson Evidence

Anecdotal evidence claims that in criminal cases, trial judges admit the prosecution's expert witnesses more readily than the defendants', and in civil cases the reverse is true; judges exclude plaintiffs' experts more often than civil defendants' experts. This occurs despite the fact that, with few exceptions, the same rules of admissibility apply to all parties and, in most jurisdictions, across criminal and civil cases. This article empirically tests this differential by reviewing judicial decisions to admit or exclude evidence holding the type of expert testimony constant, fire and arson evidence, across criminal and civil cases in the United States. The study examines the admissibility of fire and arson investigation experts in criminal and civil cases across all legal parties in fifty‐seven federal and state opinions in the United States. The findings offer empirical support of a bias in criminal cases and in civil cases which present expert witnesses at trial, and is less pronounced, but still evident, on appeal. Specifically, the role of the party that offers the evidence has a profound effect on whether arson evidence is admitted, even when factors around the judge's political affiliation, attorney experience, expert qualifications, and rules of evidence are taken into account.     

Improving Luminol Blood Detection in Forensics

The aim of this study was to develop chemical improvements to the original Weber protocol, in order to increase the intensity and time length of light emission and to eliminate false‐positive reactions. The intensity and duration of light were measured on serial blood dilutions using a plate reader chemiluminometer. Blood stains of various concentrations were impregnated in pure cellulose, dried, and luminol solution was added with/without the potential enhancers. An in silico study was also conducted, aiming to demonstrate the enhancing mechanism of hemoglobin denaturation using 8 M urea. The luminol blood detection test revealed important improvements after urea pretreatment or in the presence of monochloro‐triazinyl‐β‐cyclodextrin. This approach also eliminated the false‐positive reaction from sodium hypochlorite. These improvements could provide a higher sensitivity under particular circumstances such as old or washed blood stains, leading to a better localization for further DNA typing and higher quality photographic analysis.     

Brexit,Article 50 and the Contested British Constitution

This article discusses the early stages of the Art 50 TEU process, and those aspects that relate most clearly to British constitutional law. Its overarching theme is that the Brexit process is rendered highly problematic by the lack of any coherent conception of the British Constitution. Different parties settle on interpretations of constitutional law that support their case, but often there is no determinative answer. Three broad issues are examined in order to substantiate this claim: the EU Referendum, the triggering of Article 50, and the Devolution aspect of Brexit. I argue that each of these issues reveals tensions and competing constitutional interpretations that suggest that the British Constitution is ill‐equipped to deal with Brexit.     

Facts,Preferences, and Doctrine: An Empirical Analysis of Proportionality Judgment

Legal proportionality is one of the most important principles for adjudicating among conflicting values. However, rather little is known about the factors that play a role in the formation of proportionality judgments. This research presents the first empirical analysis in this regard, relying on a sample of 331 legal experts (lawyers and legal academics). The policy domain addressed by the experiment is the antiterrorist military practice of targeted killings, which has been the subject of a legal debate. Our experimental findings suggest that proportionality judgments are receptive to normatively relevant facts. We also find strong correlational evidence for the effect of ideological preferences on such judgments. These results are consistent for two proportionality doctrines. We suggest that proportionality judgment is anchored jointly in the experts’ policy preferences and the facts of the case. We outline the implications of the findings for the psychological and legal literature.     

Is It the What or the How? The Roles of High‐Policing Tactics and Procedural Justice in Predicting Perceptions of Hostile Treatment: The Case of Security Checks at Ben‐Gurion Airport,Israel

What affects perceptions of hostile treatment by police, characterized by feelings such as humiliation and intimidation? Is it what the police do to the citizen, or is it about how they do it? The important effects of procedural justice are well documented in the policing literature. Yet, it is not clear how high‐policing tactics, coupled with procedural justice, affect one's sense of hostile treatment: is it the case that what the police do does not matter as long as they follow the principles of procedural justice, or do some invasive or unpleasant tactics produce negative emotions regardless of the amount of procedural justice displayed by the officer? In the present study we examine this question in the context of security checks at Ben‐Gurion Airport, Israel. Using a survey of 1,970 passengers, we find that the behavioral elements of procedural justice are an important antidote, mitigating the negative effects of four “extra” screening measures on the perceived hostility of the checks. At the same time, two security measures retain an independent and significant effect. We discuss the implications of our findings and hypothesize about the characteristics of policing practices that are less sensitive to procedural justice.     

Partner Violence Entrapment Scale: Development and Psychometric Testing

This article describes the development and testing of the psychometric properties of the Partner Violence Entrapment Scale (PVES), an instrument that evaluates the women’s perceived reasons for staying in violent partner relationships. After initial pilot testing, the scale was administered to 213 Spanish women who were victims of intimate partner violence (IPV). An exploratory factor analysis identified six factors: Socio-Economic Problems, Attachment and Fear of Loneliness, Blaming Oneself and Resignation, Impact on Children, Fear of Harm and Worry for the Partner, and Feelings of Confusion. Discriminant validity was established by demonstrating associations between PVES factors and socio-demographic, clinical and abuse variables. The scale appears to be a useful assessment tool for social and clinical settings. Its factor structure, reliability, and validity need to be replicated in other populations and samples.     

Convenient and Inconvenient Truths in Family Law: Preventing Scholar‐Advocacy Bias in the Use of Social Science Research for Public Policy

This is the second of two articles on the risks of advocacy bias in the reporting of research findings when boundaries are blurred between social science research and advocacy in the pursuit of public policy. In the first article we identify common ways in which social science researchers and reviewers of research—wittingly or unwittingly—can become advocates for ideological positions and social policies at the expense of being balanced reporters of research evidence. The first article discusses the difference between truth in social science and truth in law and identifies a range of scholar‐advocacy strategies that bias research evidence, illustrated by recent debates about overnight parenting of infants and toddlers. In this second article we show how biased research evidence by scholar advocates results in increased confusion and controversy that diminishes the credibility of all parties and stalemates progress in the field, using a case illustration of intimate partner violence in family court. We also show how adherence to scientific methods prevents the misuse of research and suggest a number of collaborative, integrative measures that can help transcend the adversarial stalemate. In a look to the future we consider some unbiased, standardized ways of assessing the strength and generalizability of research evidence.     

L'affaire Groupaction: un cas de politisation de la Fonction publique fédérale?

Sommaire: l affaire Groupaction met en relief deux formes de politisation de la Fonction publique fédérale: l'une partisane, l'autre structurelle. La politisation de type partisan et I'intégration de personnel politique au sein de la Fonction publique via l'article 39 de laLoi sur la Fonction publique sont devenues des phénoménes plus répandus au cours des demiéres années. La notion de politisation structurelle sou‐ligne comment la Fonction publique canadienne n'est pas politiquement neutre face à ceux et celles qui veulent dé‐faire l'ordre fédéral. Même si elle ne constitue pas une excuse justifiant le type de comportement observé dans l'affaire Groupaction, la politisation structurelle founit le contexte pour comprendre pourquoi certains fonc‐tionnaires ont pené qu'il pouvait être légitime de contourner les régles pour préServer I'unité nationale. Abstract: The Groupadion affair draws attention to two forms of politicization in the federal public service, one partisan and the other structural. Partisan politicization and the integration of political staff within the public service through Sedion 39 ofThe Public Service Employment Act have become more common in recent years. The concept of structural politicization underlines how the Canadian public service is not politically neutral in the face of those wishing to undo the federal order. While it does not constitute an excuse that could justify the type of behaviour observed in the Groupaction affair, structural politicization provides a context for understanding why some public servants thought it could be legitimate to circumvent the rules in order to preserve national unity. L'auteur remercie son assistant de recherche, Michael Dumoulin, pour son efficacité et son esprit de détective.Il remercie également Leslie A. Pal, Herman Bakvis et André J. Béanger pour leurs commentaires sur la premiére version de ce texte présenté au congrés annuel de I'Association canadienne de science politique à Halifax en mai 2003. Il remercie enfin Madame Jocelyne Bourgon et les évaluateurs anonymes de la Revue. L'auteur se dit seul responsable de I'interprétation donnée aux événements entourant cette affaire, qui faisait toujours I'objet d'enquêtes policiéres au moment de la révision finale de cet article. … les hauts fonctionnaires chargéS de la gestion des contrats ont manifesté un mépris flagrant à I'égard de la Loi…ils ont contourné b peu prés toutes les règles. Sheila Fraser, Vérificatrice généraie du Canada