Do Nasty and Pleasant Surprises Regarding Tax Revenue Explain Spending Drifts? The Case of the Swiss Cantons

This article aims to explain the difference between the expenditure reported in governmental end-of-the-year budgets and the amounts previously forecasted in the approved beginning-of-the-year budgets. We measure how political, financial, and institutional variables affect this spending drift. We focus on two much-debated factors, namely, tax revenue budgeting errors and the stringency of fiscal rules. Our econometric approach uses a panel based on the 26 Swiss cantons covering the period of 1980 to 2011. Results suggest that stringent fiscal rules discourage budget overruns, whereas underestimating tax revenue—i.e., a budgetary “pleasant surprise”—offers the opportunity for some overspending.     

我国刑法中侦查陷阱抗辩权的错误

本文运用刑法学的基础理论，从法律错误的角度对不构成侦查陷阱抗辩权的情形进行了全面分析。     

侦查错误界定标准的基本问题研究

目前各种关于侦查错误的界定标准,虽然在某种程度上促进或丰富了侦查错误理论的发展,但是部分界定标准不符合法理或者不适用于现阶段我国关于侦查错误的理论与实践。因此,应在通过对各种侦查错误界定标准的分析和检视定位的基础之上,重新构建适合于我国的侦查错误的界定标准。     

To P or not to P? The Usefulness of P‐values in Quantitative Political Science Research

This contribution gives a short overview over the mechanics of significance testing in inferential statistics, in particular linear models, and tries to put the discussion about the usefulness of p‐values into a broader perspective of scientific practise. This discussion needs to be embedded into the larger debate about the credibility crises faced by empirical social science research. In particular, it seems of utmost importance to discuss what the profession as a whole, journals, publishers, as well as editors can do to encourage better research practise that generates reliable and useful empirical findings.     

Validation of powder X-ray diffraction following EN ISO/IEC 17025

Powder X-ray diffraction (PXRD) is used widely in forensic science laboratories with the main focus of qualitative phase identification. Little is found in literature referring to the topic of validation of PXRD in the field of forensic sciences. According to EN ISO/IEC 17025, the method has to be tested for several parameters. Trueness, specificity, and selectivity of PXRD were tested using certified reference materials or a combination thereof. All three tested parameters showed the secure performance of the method. Sample preparation errors were simulated to evaluate the robustness of the method. These errors were either easily detected by the operator or nonsignificant for phase identification. In case of the detection limit, a statistical evaluation of the signal-to-noise ratio showed that a peak criterion of three sigma is inadequate and recommendations for a more realistic peak criterion are given. Finally, the results of an international proficiency test showed the secure performance of PXRD.     

“两个证据规定”颁行背景的理论解读

在复杂而多元的社会主义法律体系中,"两个证据规定"之所以能及时出台,客观上有其急迫性。"两高三部"通过完善刑事证据法,大力革新我国刑事证据制度,主要是致力于防控刑事冤案与司法误判,转变司法实践的办案模式,缓步推进刑事诉讼法的再修订,以及履行人权保障的国际义务。这些也正是我国刑事诉讼制度的中长期使命与发展重任。     

证券做市交易与市场操纵的界分

2017年12月4日,中国证监会针对做市商的市场操纵行为作出了首单行政处罚,但该决定实际仍未明确如何在逻辑上和事实上厘清证券做市交易与市场操纵行为的关系。虽然做市商的流动性供给和定价功能,会导致做市商对证券价格的内心价值判断与其做市行为客观所表达的观点产生不一致,但该种不一致乃是为履行积极义务所致,因此也就不存在操纵的故意,在逻辑上也就不属于市场操纵。是否存在操纵的故意,同时也就构成了在事实上区分证券做市交易和市场操纵的关键。而该项事实认定在新三板市场上应当考虑到低流动性的市场环境、持续双向报价的积极义务、中央交易对手的特别安排、调节库存的客观需要等特殊因素,设置异于通常事实认定标准的特别要求。虽然该种做法存在发生假阴性错误的风险,但从协调假阳性错误及假阴性错误的逻辑和方法来看仍是妥当的选择。     

Post-conviction DNA exonerations

The role of DNA profiling is constantly increasing in various fields and criminal justice is not an exception. Several individuals, who are wrongfully convicted, have been exonerated based on DNA evidence. Research in the U.S. has consistently found the major factors contributing to wrongful convictions to be： （1） eyewitness errors; （2） mishandling of evidence by police and prosecutors; （3） false or coerced confessions; （4） improper interrogations and line-ups; （5）jailhouse informants or ＂snitches＂; （6） ineffective assistance of counsel; （7） forensic errors; and （8） the adversarial system. This paper examines the data made available by the Innocent Project for 233 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the U.S. since 1989.     

Understanding research methods,limitations, and applications of drug data collected by the National Forensic Laboratory Information System (NFLIS-Drug)

The National Forensic Laboratory Information System (NFLIS) is a drug surveillance program of the US Drug Enforcement Administration that systematically collects data on drugs that are seized by law enforcement and submitted to and analyzed by the Nation's forensic laboratories (NFLIS-Drug). NFLIS-Drug data are increasingly used in predictive modeling and drug surveillance to examine drug availability patterns. Given the complexity of the data and data collection, there are some common methodological pitfalls that we highlight with the aim of helping researchers avoid these concerns. The analysis done for this Technical Note is based on a review of the scientific literature that includes 428 unique, refereed article citations in 182 distinct journals published between January 1, 2005, and April 30, 2021. Each article was analyzed according to how NFLIS-Drug data were mentioned and whether NFLIS-Drug data were included. A sample of 37 articles was studied in-depth, and data issues were summarized. Using examples from the literature, this Technical Note highlights eight broad concerns that have important implications for the proper applications, interpretations, and limitations of NFLIS-Drug data with suggestions for improving research methods and accurate reporting of forensic drug data. NFLIS-Drug data are timely and provide key information to inform drug use trends across the United States; however, our present analysis shows that NFLIS-Drug data are misunderstood and represented in the literature. In addition to highlighting these issues, DEA has created several resources to assist NFLIS data users and researchers, which are summarized in the discussion.     

Educating Jurors about Forensic Evidence: Using an Expert Witness and Judicial Instructions to Mitigate the Impact of Invalid Forensic Science Testimony

Invalid expert witness testimony that overstated the precision and accuracy of forensic science procedures has been highlighted as a common factor in many wrongful conviction cases. This study assessed the ability of an opposing expert witness and judicial instructions to mitigate the impact of invalid forensic science testimony. Participants (N = 155) acted as mock jurors in a sexual assault trial that contained both invalid forensic testimony regarding hair comparison evidence, and countering testimony from either a defense expert witness or judicial instructions. Results showed that the defense expert witness was successful in educating jurors regarding limitations in the initial expert's conclusions, leading to a greater number of not-guilty verdicts. The judicial instructions were shown to have no impact on verdict decisions. These findings suggest that providing opposing expert witnesses may be an effective safeguard against invalid forensic testimony in criminal trials.