Vom „demokratischen Frieden” zur demokratiezentrierten Friedens-und Gewaltforschung

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

The `Ideal' Victim v Successful Rape Complainants: Not What You Might Expect

This article proposes that feminist legal critics need to be able to explain how some rape cases succeed in securing convictions. The means by which rape cases are routinely disqualified in the criminal justice system have received widespread attention. It is well established in feminist legal critique that female complainants are discredited if they fail to conform to an archaic stereotype of the genuine or ‘real’ rape victim. This victim is not only morally and sexually virtuous she is also cautious, unprovocative, and consistent. Defence tactics for discrediting rape testimony involve exposing the complainant's alleged failure to comply with the sexual and behavioural standards of the normative victim. This understanding of how rape complain(an)ts are disqualified is not predictive, however, of the complainants whose cases succeed in securing convictions. This article reviews some successful Australian rape cases and considers the ways in which they disturb feminist understandings of how rape complaints are discredited in the criminal justice system. It proposes that recent research analysing the discourse of rape trials provides a way of explaining the apparent discrepancies between the ‘ideal’ rape victim and successful complainants. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Wrapped in silence: psychotherapists and confidentiality in the courtroom

The impact of the Austrian Psychotherapy Act, which, in contrast to legal provisions in the United States, does not provide for any exceptions to breach confidentiality, is compared with the effects of U.S. law on dealing with confidentiality. The authors investigated the impact of this law in light of three common situations in psychotherapy that may jeopardize strict confidentiality: treating potentially dangerous patients, giving testimony, and serving as a psychotherapist in prison. Under the strict provisions of the Austrian Psychotherapy Act, a breach may be excusable in the case of a highly probable danger, but Austrian psychotherapists cannot be obliged to serve as witnesses or as experts in civil or criminal cases, as American psychotherapists can. Psychotherapy in prison, where release is contingent on the success of the therapy and the divulging of information could be in the interests of the patient as well as the court and the public, requires a modified dealing with confidentiality.     

Constraints in the police use of force: Implications of the just war tradition

The “just war” philosophy of Cicero, St. Augustine, and St. Thomas Aquinas has had momentous and provocative implications for modern political theory. The use of force by police is one theme through which the just war tradition can be utilized to demonstrate the extent of infusion for the concept in the Western political archetype. As police become constrained in their use of force, they are bound by the concepts inherent in the philosophy of the just war doctrine. The Supreme Court, likewise, has been influenced by the philosophy of the just war tradition in many of its decisions regarding the proper use of force by police.     

Spontaneous rupture of the urinary bladder

The report presents the case of a 33-year-old man under the primary assumption of homicide in which the court-ordered autopsy revealed death as a result of bleeding due to a spontaneous rupture of the urinary bladder. The article gives a short summary of the pathomorphological findings and their respective causes, for example the typical location of the rupture at the posterior wall and roof of the bladder and the common concomitant drunkenness. Furthermore, obligatory forensic investigations--beside the autopsy--are mentioned and discussed.     

Commons ignorance: the failure of environmental law to produce needed information on health and the environment

One of the most significant problems facing environmental law is the dearth of scientific information available to assess the impact of industrial activities on public health and the environment. After documenting the significant gaps in existing information, this Article argues that existing laws both exacerbate and perpetuate this problem. By failing to require actors to assess the potential harm from their activities, and by penalizing them with additional regulation when they do, existing laws fail to counteract actors' natural inclination to remain silent about the harms that they might be causing. Both theory and practice confirm that when the stakes are high, actors not only will resist producing potentially incriminating information but will invest in discrediting public research that suggests their activities are harmful. The Article concludes with specific recommendations about how these perverse incentives for ignorance can be reversed.