论公众人物及其隐私权

公众人物是指在一定时间和空间范围内具有重要影响，并且与社会公众利益有关从而为该时空范围内的人们所广泛知晓和关注的人物。其判断标准有两个：一是社会知名度，二是与社会公共利益相关。由隐私权的基本权利性质决定，公众人物作为社会大众中的一员享有隐私权是无可争议的，公众人物的隐私权理应受到相应的法律保护。并且，基于公众人物隐私权不同于普通公民隐私权的特性，应当加大对公众人物的隐私权的保护力度。     

我国能否引入英美法上的简易判决？

美国法上的简易判决，是在当事人双方对案件要件事实不存在实质争议且一方当事人有权获得有利判决的条件下，法院做出的一种不经庭审的实体终局性判决。简易判决被美国从英国引入后，与美国的诉答程序、证据开示等制度紧密结合，具有过滤案件、避免无益庭审等功能。虽然这项制度对我国有着很大的吸引力，但是鉴于目前我国审前准备程序的不完善以及事实认定方面有很大的任意性，暂时不宜引入该制度。     

我国区际法院判决承认与执行制度之比较

近年来，我国在区际法院判决相互承认与执行方面取得了进展，先后生效的几个区际司法协助规定与安排的达成无疑将有助于进一步推动我国区际法院判决相互承认与执行的开展。但是，这仅仅是一种权宜之计或是一种带有过渡性质的“半成品”，而较为理想的模式应是进一步制定一部统一适用于大陆与港澳台地区的判决承认与执行的专门立法。     

论我国建立案例指导制度的必要性与可行性

案例指导制度是对我国成文法的必要补充，有助于实现司法统一，司法公正。我国目前已经具备了建立案例指导制度的基本条件．应尽快构建相关制度和机制，抓紧实现推行。从目前各地人民法院实行案例指导的实践看，存在着一些亟待解决的问题，最高人民法院应尽快修改完善《关于加强和完善案例指导工作的若干意见》，正式确立具有中国特色的案例指导制度。     

善意取得制度适用范围的物权立法探析

善意取得是适应商品交换需要而产生的一项重要的法律制度。该制度的出现对于保护交易安全、促进财产流转、维护社会正常的经济秩序起到了积极的促进作用,善意取得制度适用于动产是世界许多国家民法传统的规定,也被学术界所公认。我国未来的《物权法》应当明确不动产善意取得的范围,不动产的善意取得也应受到物权法的保护。     

职务犯罪的概念、范围和特点

职务犯罪是指从事公务的人员,利用职务或者亵渎职务,违反职责规定,给国家和人民的利益造成重大损失的一类犯罪。可分为利用职务的犯罪和亵渎职务的犯罪,共有141种具体犯罪,占刑法分则规定的全部犯罪的四分之一左右。具有犯罪主体特殊、犯罪行为与职务必须有关联、社会危害严重等六个特点。     

严格限制结果加重犯的范围与刑罚

我国刑法中的结果加重犯数量繁多,是适用死刑最多的犯罪类型;但是,结果加重犯是结果责任的残余,缺乏加重刑罚的合理根据。因此,一方面,要严格限制结果加重犯的成立范围:加重结果必须是成立条件之外的、具体罪刑规范阻止的加重结果;被害对象必须限于基本行为的对象;基本行为必须具有发生加重结果的特别危险性;因果关系必须符合"直接性要件";行为人对加重结果至少有过失,而且对人身伤亡、公共危害之外的加重结果必须具有故意。另一方面,也要从量刑上限制结果加重犯的刑罚。     

论国际商会仲裁审理范围书制度

国际商会仲裁体制下的审理范围书制度起源于当事人在争议事件发生后签订的“自愿书”。由于审理范围书是对当事人争议主题和仲裁程序问题等关键事项的明确化,关系到仲裁范围的界定和案件实体结果的裁决,从理论和实务的角度对审理范围书制度,即审理范围书的拟定程序、方式、主要内容及其积极作用等方面进行分析就具有了非常重要的意义,对我国商事仲裁制度创新具有镜鉴功能。     

Addressing Gaps in the Maturity of Judgment Literature: Age Differences and Delinquency

Over the past decade, a majority of states have legislated to expand their capacity to try adolescents as adults [Griffin (2003). Trying and sentencing juveniles as adults: An analysis of state transfer and blended sentencing laws. Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice]. In response, researchers have investigated factors that may affect adolescent culpability [Steinberg and Scott (Am Psychol 58(12):1009–1018, 2003)]. Research on immature judgment posits that psychosocial influences on adolescent decision processes results in reduced criminal responsibility [Cauffman and Steinberg (Behav Sci Law 18(6):741–760, 2000); Scott, Reppucci, and Woolard (Law Hum Behav 19(3):221–244, 1995); Steinberg and Cauffman (Law Hum Behav 20(3):249–272, 1996)]. The current study utilizes hypothetical vignettes and standardized measures of maturity of judgment (responsibility, temperance, and perspective) to examine gaps in previous maturity of judgment findings (Cauffman and Steinberg 2000). This work suggests that adolescents (ages 14–17) display less responsibility and perspective relative to college students (ages 18–21), young-adults (ages 22–27), and adults (ages 28–40). Further, this research finds no maturity of judgment differences between delinquent and non-delinquent youth, but does find significant maturity of judgment differences between high and low delinquency male youth. Finally, results show that maturity of judgment predicts self-reported delinquency beyond the contributions of age, gender, race, education level, SES, and antisocial decision making. Implications for the juvenile justice system are discussed. This research was conducted in partial fulfillment of the M.A degree in Psychology from the University of New Hampshire.     

Are accurate witnesses more likely to make absolute judgments?

The present study tested the Two-Judgment Theory of Eyewitness Identification Accuracy. Specifically, the extent to which participants were able to engage in an absolute judgment strategy was manipulated by varying the time available to view a lineup. Providing a limited exposure to a lineup should “interrupt” decision making, whereby witnesses can only engage a relative strategy, thus leading to higher false positive responding given a target-absent lineup. Seventy-four adults viewed a 1-minute video that exposed them to an unknown target and subsequently viewed the lineup for a limited (2 s) or an unlimited amount of time. Although false positive rates were similar across conditions, accurate witnesses were more confident than inaccurate witnesses. Confidence was negatively correlated with response latency such that witnesses who took more time to make a decision were less confident in their decisions compared to witnesses who made more rapid decisions. Response latency did not differ for accurate and inaccurate witnesses. Limitations and suggestions for future research on the Two-Judgment Theory are discussed.