Evidence for Connections Between Prosecutor-Reported Marijuana Case Dispositions and Community Youth Marijuana-Related Attitudes and Behaviors

This article examines relationships between local drug policy (as represented by prosecutor-reported case outcomes for first-offender juvenile marijuana possession cases) and youth self-reported marijuana use, perceived risk, and disapproval. Interviews with prosecutors and surveys of 8th-, 10th-, and 12th-grade students in the United States were conducted in 2000. Analyses include data from 97 prosecutors and students from 127 schools in 40 states. Results indicate significant relationships between local drug policy and youth marijuana use and attitudes. In general, more-severe dispositions are associated with less marijuana use, higher disapproval rates, and increased perceptions of great risk. Associations primarily appear to be specific to marijuana-related outcomes. Results are discussed within the framework of both deterrence and broader social norms regarding substance use.     

Validation of the AMPFℓSTR® MiniFilerTM PCR Amplification Kit for Use in Forensic Casework*

Abstract: The AmpF?STR^® MiniFiler^TM PCR Amplification Kit is designed to genotype degraded and/or inhibited DNA samples when the AmpF?STR^® Identifiler^TM PCR Amplification Kit is incapable of generating a complete genetic profile. Validation experiments, following the SWGDAM guidelines, were designed to evaluate the performance of MiniFiler. Data obtained demonstrated that MiniFiler, when used in conjunction with Identifiler, provided an increased ability to obtain genetic profiles from challenged samples. The optimum template range was found to be between 0.2 and 0.6 ng, with 0.3 ng yielding the best results. Full concordance was achieved between the MiniFiler kit and Identifiler kit except in a single case of a null allele at locus D21S11. Numerous instances of severe heterozygous peak imbalance (<50%) were observed in single source samples amplified within the optimum range of input DNA suggesting that caution be taken when attempting to deduce component genotypes in a mixture.     

Justice denied and justice delayed: the trials and tribulations of a Victorian solicitor

This paper explores a Victorian cause célèbre, particularly the latter stages, in which a London solicitor, W.H. Barber, battled first to obtain the renewal of his practising certificate and then to claim compensation from public funds for the sufferings he had endured as a result of his wrongful conviction. Barber's misfortunes arose from his unwitting participation in a series of sensational frauds on the Bank of England, leading to his transportation to the penal colony on Norfolk Island in 1844. Pardoned on the basis of confessions from the wrongdoers, his readmission to the profession was unrelentingly opposed by the Incorporated Law Society, and he only prevailed after a series of rebuffs in the courts.

Barber's tribulations, which had first highlighted the defects of the criminal trial, provide an unusual insight into the under-explored and uncertain state of solicitors' professional ethics at this time and the controversial role of the ILS in enforcing them. They also yield valuable information on solicitors' practices and the effects of a royal pardon.     

Effect of Choice of Measure on the Size of a Racial Disparity

In criminological studies of racial disparities the effect of race on outcomes is assessed after statistical controls for other variables. There is no universally accepted measure of size of disparity after controls in the most common type of disparity study: the study of binary outcomes. Some such studies use a measure that lends itself to interpretation in terms of the proportional reduction in error (PRE). Most use a non-PRE measure of association. This study investigates the effect of choice of measure on conclusions about the size of a disparity after controls. For illustrative purposes the study analyzes data on the awarding of sentence reductions to drug traffickers. After controls, blacks are found to be substantially less likely than whites to receive a reduction according to a type of non-PRE measure: an odds ratio derived from a logit model. But using the same data and model, PRE measures obtained from an ROC analysis indicate that, after controls, there is hardly any difference between the races in their likelihood of sentence reduction. Results illustrate the study's thesis: that the choice of measure can powerfully affect conclusions. The findings' implications—for policymakers and for researchers who conduct racial disparity studies—are discussed.     

The legitimization and institutionalization of ‘parental alienation’ in the Province of Quebec

ABSTRACT

This article examines the legitimization and institutionalization of ‘parental alienation’ discourse in the Province of Quebec, Canada. It draws upon an analysis of 31 documents (legislation, research reports and articles, training documents, professional documents and media articles) and interviews with 13 key informants, who were selected based on their knowledge of ‘parental alienation’ in research, policies or practices. The research findings reveal that the legitimization and institutionalization of ‘parental alienation’ discourse is a more recent process than in other provinces and countries, but that it has now permeated child custody as well as child protection proceedings. Academic researchers and media have been instrumental in this legitimization and institutionalization process, while the role played by changes to child protection policies is more ambiguous. The findings reveal researchers’ and experts’ tendency to distance themselves from Gardner’s controversial work on ‘parental alienation syndrome’ and to address the critiques by proposing new approaches and new concepts. However, the terms ‘parental alienation syndrome’, ‘parental alienation’ and ‘alienating behaviours’ are often used interchangeably, and assessment practices tend to rely on similar indicators.     

Normative power Europe and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: the EU’s peacebuilding narrative meets local narratives

ABSTRACT

This article conceives the EU’s normative power in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a narrative that projects views of the international system, the EU’s identity as a peacebuilder, and its positions on specific conflict issues. Highlighting the importance of local narratives as cultural filters, this article argues that a high degree of alignment of local narratives with key elements of the EU’s normative power narrative facilitates positive images of the EU as a normative power in peacebuilding, whilst diverging local narratives tend to give rise to more critical views. Yet, the case of Palestine also shows that strong narrative alignment with the EU may encourage high expectations, resulting in critical views about inconsistencies between the EU’s normative aspirations and its actual foreign policy conduct.