澳大利亚联邦法院对专家证据的采纳

I. Introduction
The opinion evidence of experts is an exception to the general rule that witnesses can only give evidence of that which they have seen or heard and may not give evidence of inferences which arise from their observations and from that which they have heard.     

Legal narratives as significant news sources about mental illness and violent crime

Media coverage about people affected by mental illness is an area of research that is extensively examined. Many scholars argue that the media depicts people with mental illness as inherently violent and dangerous within sensational narratives. These depictions are criticized for reinforcing the social stigma and disadvantages many of the mentally ill face. The media does, however, require news sources and, in the context of crime and mental illness, the courts are a significant source. Through qualitative content analysis of Australian newspaper articles, this research examines an under-researched and incompletely theorized area. In doing so, it demonstrates that media depictions of some mentally ill offenders reflect and heavily draw upon legal narratives and what is argued in court about these offenders in the context of criminal responsibility and legal insanity.     

农村多元化纠纷解决机制中的司法救济

现代司法作为西方法治的舶来品对中国固有的司法传统带来了一定的冲击。在依法治国的今天,现代司法与中国传统的接触更多地表现在当下的农村社会。设置在乡镇中的人民法庭代表着司法权在基层社会中的渗透,作为一种权利救济途径的司法救济将民众与人民法庭联系到一起,将传统的纠纷解决模式与现代司法联系到一起。在这个传统与现代相互交错的时代,我们应当关注于司法救济如何落实抑或人民法庭如何在基层扎根。     

The Family Therapist in the Courts

SUMMARY

This article describes the Parent Education and Custody Effectiveness Program (P.E.A.C.E.), a series of interdisciplinary educational seminars for persons going through the divorce process; reports on the results of three P.E.A.C.E. Program pilot studies that occurred in New York State; and describes the crucial role of mental health professionals in this program.     

Child Welfare and the Courts

ABSTRACT

This exploratory study focuses on the relationships between professionals working in the juvenile dependency system, including judicial officers, attorneys, social workers, and court-appointed special advocates. It includes an examination of the quality of professional relationships, factors contributing to tensions, the consequences of difficult relationships, and strategies for improving relationships. It utilizes interviews and focus groups with professionals and focus groups with clients involved in the juvenile dependency system. The major findings address: (a) the nature and quality of professional relationships, (b) the structural and operational factors contributing to tension in those relationships, (c) client perceptions of professional relationships, and (d) respondent recommendations for improving professional relationships. This study is a contribution to the small but growing literature on the complexity of the interface between public child welfare services and the court system.     

论当事人举证与法院查证的关系——兼评法释[1998]14号关于当事人举证和法院查证的规定

在坚持当事人举证为原则、法院查证为补充的思想指导下,严格界定当事人举证和法院查证及当事人申请法院查证的范围、程序和时间,建立完整的举证责任制度,完善当事人取证制度,合理分配举证责任,建立健全当事人履行举证责任的法律保障机制,使审判方式改革真正落到实处。     

REPORT FROM THE WINGSPREAD CONFERENCE ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND FAMILY COURTS

In February 2007 the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts brought together a working group of thirty‐seven experienced practitioners and researchers to identify and explore conceptual and practical tensions that have hampered effective work with families in which domestic violence has been identified or alleged. Five central sets of issues were raised at the conference and are discussed in this report. These include the following: differentiation among families experiencing domestic violence, screening and triage, participation by families in various processes and services, appropriate outcomes for children, and family court roles and resources. The report emphasizes the need for continued multidisciplinary collaboration in order to better serve families affected by domestic violence and it includes an appendix of consensus points as well as suggestions for formation of ongoing work groups.     

Should I stay or should I go?

Legal context: The European Patent Convention inherently allows parallel revocationproceedings to take place in the EPO and the domestic patentcourts. As a result, parties to UK patent proceedings frequentlyapply for a stay pending the outcome of proceedings in the EPO.There is commonly assumed to be a presumption in favour of thisstay, so long as it does not amount to an injustice. Key points: This article reviews the UK case law that has followed the Courtof Appeal decision in Kimberly-Clark, to see if this presumptionin favour of a stay is sustained. These cases show that, whendeciding whether to order a stay, judges perform a balancingexercise of a number of considerations. In practice it appearsthat these considerations easily topple the presumption. Practical significance: By providing a comparison of the considerations put before thecourts in the past, this article seeks to aid practitionersin judging those factors likely to affect the success of a stayapplication. It also highlights the lack of authority at appellatelevel on whether it is lawful for patent courts not to ordera stay.     

DOWNWARD DEPARTURES FOR SERIOUS VIOLENT OFFENDERS: LOCAL COURT “CORRECTIONS” TO PENNSYLVANIA'S SENTENCING GUIDELINES*

We examine downward departures for serious violent offenders, using quantitative and qualitative data from Pennsylvania. We find that offense severity and prior record have negative direct effects on downward departures, but a positive interaction effect on them. Offenders convicted of aggravated assault, those who plead guilty, young black women, and offenders sentenced in large urban courts are more likely to receive downward departures, whereas those convicted by trial, young Hispanic males, and offenders sentenced in small rural courts are less likely to receive them. We argue that downward departures represent local “corrections” to guideline recommendations when there is a mismatch between guidelines and local court actors' definitions of key focal concerns of sentencing for serious violent offenders.     

When a Veterans’ Treatment Court Fails: Lessons Learned from a Qualitative Evaluation

ABSTRACT

More than 500 veterans treatment courts (VTCs) provide thousands of eligible veterans across the nation alternative means of resolving criminal charges through a therapeutic, judicially supervised programs. The majority of those VTCs mandate that veteran participants work with a volunteer veteran mentor throughout their tenure in VTC programs. Mentoring has been heralded as a critical and valuable component of VTCs, and it is believed that mentoring discourages substance abuse and promotes adherence to substance abuse interventions. But very little is known about how mentoring actually works. Scant research documents how mentors interact with mentees, what their responsibilities are, or what impact they have on veterans’ progress through rigorous VTC protocols. Through interview data collected following the death of a veteran mentee in a northeastern Study VTC, this research provides in-depth analysis of how mentors and mentees understand their responsibilities with respect to illicit substance use and violations of VTCs’ sobriety requirements. This article provides background data on VTCs and veterans who participate in them, then explores interview and documentary data as part of a case study of a policy failure in the Study VTC. The article concludes with recommendations that could improve mentor/mentee relationships and VTC participants’ access to treatment.