Moral wrongfulness and insanity: a New Zealand sample

Introduction: This study sought to identify the common characteristics amongst defendants found legally insane, compared to those who were psychiatrically evaluated yet convicted of their crime. Method: A retrospective review of court-ordered psychiatric court reports and legal outcomes was conducted, for all defendants referred for insanity evaluations in the largest city in New Zealand (and its surrounding rural regions) for a 7-year period. Results: The majority (60%; 37) of those referred for evaluation were found legally insane. The opinion regarding moral wrongfulness was the single factor that differentiated successful insanity defendants from those who were found guilty. Conclusions: Despite the centrality of the insanity defence to forensic psychiatry, few studies internationally consider characteristics of those found insane, particularly in comparison with those who are found guilty. Psychiatrically evaluated defendants in this sample were relatively homogenous, perhaps due to the court liaison nurse screening process.     

第三人同意的无证搜查：美国联邦最高法院伦道夫案评析

美国的刑事诉讼无时无刻不体现着"控辩双方平等武装、平等对抗,法院居中裁断"的精神.犯罪嫌疑人与他人分事住宅的事实意味着该特定空间内的所有权益均可由任意一方处分;第三人同意警方搜查有罪证据是犯罪嫌疑人必须承担的风险.犯罪嫌疑人的反对不具有实质意义,共同权利人的同意足以满足宪法的标准;与他人共享住宅的事实限定了犯罪嫌疑人主张个人隐私的实际范围.     

庭审证据调查研究

两大法系的审判模式决定了其各自庭审证据调查制度的特色,而传统中国刑事诉讼一直以大陆法系职权主义为模板,因此在保留大陆法系职权主义庭审证据调查制度的基础上适当借鉴英美法系庭审证据调查制度的合理因素,是中国刑事诉讼庭审证据调查制度改革路径的必然选择。具体的改革思路是(:一)贯彻“以听证为主、调查为辅”的原则(;二)在启动机制方面:规定以当事人申请为原则、以职权为例外(;三)对职权调查的限制措施包括:调查的范围、调查的程度以及调查的方式和结果的认证。     

欧洲法院预审裁决制度初探

预审裁决制度是<欧洲共同体条约>当中最引人注目,最重要的规定之一.在特定的案件中,成员国法院在作出判决之前,必须将某些欧共体法律问题交给欧洲法院作出预审裁决.它的最主要的目的是保证欧洲法院对欧共体法律拥有做出最明确解释的司法权,以保证欧共体法律解释的统一,同时消除成员国法院之间对欧共体法律在理解上的分歧.     

警察出庭作证的法理分析

警察出庭作证是诉讼理论和司法实践的需要,在国外也十分普遍但在国内却一直将警察排除在证人之外。虽然两高的解释现在对此有所规定但内容与范围十分片面。我国应建立警察出庭作证制度。     

最高人民法院大法官的流动分析

大法官流出最高人民法院的背后,反映出来的仍然是法院体制的官僚化、法官的公务员化。从知识的角度来看,这破坏了上诉审与初审司法知识的分工,以及司法与其他部门知识的分工,不利于司法知识传统的形成;同时也强化了上级法院对下级法院的控制,以及法院与其他部门的同质化。     

调解的重构(下)——以法院调解的改革为重点

调解作为中国自古就存在的一种纠纷解决方式 ,甚至是社会治理的一种制度性或体制性存在 ,在现代仍然有着极为重要的意义。本文采取一种综合各种功能的多元价值论 ,主张客观地认识调解的各种功能和价值。同时 ,力图通过对于以法院调解改革为重点获取的实证资料的分析 ,提出一种有关我国调解的功能和价值的建设性的意见或理论框架 ,实现一种对于调解的重构 ,以使其获得现代转型和重生。     

香港特区终审法院判决与"人大释法"不一致所引发的内地孕妇来港产子潮问题探讨

香港特区终审法院在庄礼源案的裁决对香港产生了深远重大的影响。该案的判决与全国人大常委会在1999年6月26日对香港基本法有关条款作出的解释不尽一致。若终审法院在裁决庄丰源案时能考虑到"人大释法"就有关筹委会的意见已反映在《基本法》第24条第2款其他各项的立法原意这一决议中,则有相当充分的法律理据来裁定庄丰源败诉。这样非法入境、逾期居留或在香港临时居留的人在香港逗留期间所生的中国籍子女,并不能享有香港居留权。同时,内地孕妇亦不会因为希望其子女获得香港居留权而引发争相到香港产子的情况。     

Making just decisions in magistrates' courts

Professional magistrates' sentencing procedures were examined as prototypic cases of expert processes involved in making just decisions, with analysis of their attention to information and the inferences they drew from case details and their own patterned knowledge. Magistrates' sorting and verbalized sentencing of six shoplifting cases revealed that they were accessing and using three schemas for categorizing shoplifters, with different emphases and valences, and different penalties. The schemas categorized shoplifters as cases of greed, need, or troubled persons. Tough magistrates followed the greed schema more than the lenient who followed the need and troubled schemas more consistently. Information use and inferences in a sample case illustrate schema differences.