“Impossible Families”: Mixed‐Citizenship Status Couples and the Law

This article explores the complex and contradictory relationship between citizenship in the law and the immigrant reality of mixed‐citizenship family life through in‐depth interviews with individuals in mixed‐citizenship marriages. An examination of mixed‐citizenship marriage exposes the inadequacies of approaching citizenship as an individual‐centered concept. The data indicate that, though both immigration and citizenship laws focus on the individual, the repercussions of those laws have family‐level effects. Because of their spouses' immigrant status, many citizens are obliged by the law to live the immigrant experience in their own country or to become immigrants themselves.     

Litigant Status and Trial Court Appeal Mobilization

The advantages held by haves over have nots in litigation have long fascinated scholars, with a long line of research revealing that litigant status often affects litigant resources, experience, and chances of overall success from trial courts to appellate courts. What has received considerably less attention, however, is how this status affects the decision to appeal. Bringing a new perspective to this important area holding implications for the shape and content of the judicial hierarchy, this study analyzes the decision of the losing federal district court litigant to appeal to the US courts of appeals. Utilizing an original database containing a sample of federal district court civil cases decided between 2000 and 2004, the results indicate, as predicted, that litigant status differentials affect whether there will be an appeal. This influence is further magnified when conditioned upon the relative costs of the appeal. These findings provide one of the first detailed examinations of litigant status and appeals coming from US trial courts and, simultaneously, offer the first empirical evidence to date that business litigants, like previously known government parties, are advantaged over individuals when deciding whether to appeal.     

Mental Capacity Act,Anorexia Nervosa and the Choice Between Life‐Prolonging Treatment and Palliative Care: A NHS Foundation Trust v Ms X

The Court of Protection decided in A NHS Foundation Trust v Ms X that an anorexia nervosa patient lacked the capacity to refuse treatment for her eating disorder, but that it was not in her best‐interests to be subject to force‐feeding to prolong her life. The Court, vindicating previous judgments in similar cases, considered that the eating disorder rendered the patient incapable of deciding on nutrition and, therefore, that she lacked the capacity to refuse treatment for anorexia nervosa. This paper questions the narrow way in which the patient's decision was characterised by the Court in this and previous cases, which led to an application of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 that is incompatible with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities because, based on a diagnosis only, anorexia nervosa patients were denied the right to decide where the balance lies between quality and duration of their own lives.     

Objective Analysis of Impressed Chisel Toolmarks

Historical and recent challenges to the practice of comparative forensic examination have created a driving force for the formation of objective methods for toolmark identification. In this study , fifty sequentially manufactured chisels were used to create impression toolmarks in lead (500 toolmarks total). An algorithm previously used to statistically separate known matching and nonmatching striated screwdriver marks and quasi-striated plier marks was used to evaluate the chisel marks. Impression toolmarks, a more complex form of toolmark, pose a more difficult test for the algorithm that was originally designed for striated toolmarks. Results show in this instance that the algorithm can separate matching and nonmatching impression marks, providing further validation of the assumption that toolmarks are identifiably unique.     

Lawyers' Perceptions of the U.S. Supreme Court: Is the Court a “Political” Institution?

Do legal elites—lawyers admitted to federal appellate bars—perceive the Supreme Court as a “political” institution? Legal elites differentiate themselves from the mass public in the amount and sources of information about the Court. They also hold near‐universal perceptions of Court legitimacy, a result we use to derive competing theoretical expectations regarding the impact of ideological disagreement on various Court perceptions. Survey data show that many legal elites perceive the Court as political in its decision making, while a minority perceive the Court as activist and influenced by external political forces. Ideological disagreement with the Court's outputs significantly elevates political perceptions of decision making, while it exhibits a null and moderate impact on perceptions of activism and external political influence, respectively. To justify negative affect derived from ideological disagreement, elites highlight the political aspects of the Court's decision making rather than engage in “global delegitimization” of the institution itself.     

A Rapid and Efficient Method for Evaluation of Suspect Testimony: Palynological Scanning

A rapid method for evaluating suspect testimony is valuable at any stage in an inquiry and can result in a change of direction in an investigation. Rape cases, in particular, can present problems where a defendant renders DNA analysis redundant by claiming that the claimant consented to have sexual relations. Forensic palynology is valuable in confirming or eliminating locations as being crime scenes, thus checking the testimony of both parties. In contrast to some forensic disciplines, forensic palynology can provide critical information without time-consuming full analysis. Two cases are described where the palynological assemblages from comparator samples of pertinent places were compared with those obtained from clothing of claimants and defendants. The results of rapid microscopical scanning of relevant preparations led to early confessions, thus obviating the need for costly analyses and protracted court proceedings. A third case demonstrates the unbiased nature of this technique where a man, although innocent of any offense, lied about having visited the crime scene for fear of prosecution. This highlights the need for sensitive policing in claims of rape.     

The Homicide–Suicide Phenomenon: Findings of Psychological Autopsies

Homicide–suicide represents a single episode of violence which may decimate an entire family. This study aimed to further describe motives and context of these tragedies. Psychological autopsies were completed for 18 homicide–suicide cases in Dallas, Texas. This included postevent interviews with surviving family members and review of police and coroner records. Two‐thirds of perpetrators had made either verbal or written threats prior to the homicide–suicide. A simplified typology describing victim–perpetrator relationship and motive type is suggested for future studies and clinical ease. Two‐thirds of perpetrators fell into the category of Intimate‐Possessive, most of whom were depressed men who were abusing substances and undergoing separation. Additional categories included Intimate‐Ailing, Filial‐Revenge, Familial‐Psychotic, and Friend‐Psychotic. Further, implications from this psychological autopsy study regarding risk assessment include use of collateral interviews regarding threats and past violence.