Prisons or Problem-Solving: Does the Public Support Specialty Courts?

ABSTRACT

Recently, “problem-solving” courts have been developed as an alternative to imprisonment. They are often called “specialty” courts because they process and divert into treatment programs offenders who are seen as different from the general criminal population, such as those with mental health or drug problems, those who are homeless or veterans, and those who engage in domestic violence. Based on a 2017 national survey of 1,000 respondents, the current study examines overall public support for rehabilitation as a goal of corrections and then focuses specifically on support for different types of specialty courts. The analysis reveals that the American public endorses not only the rehabilitative ideal but also the use of problem-solving courts. Further, with only minimal variation, strong support for these courts appears to exist regardless of political orientation and sociodemographic characteristics.     

What do forensic analysts consider relevant to their decision making?

In response to research demonstrating that irrelevant contextual information can bias forensic science analyses, authorities have increasingly urged laboratories to limit analysts' access to irrelevant and potentially biasing information (Dror and Cole (2010) [3]; National Academy of Sciences (2009) [18]; President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (2016) [22]; UK Forensic Science Regulator (2015) [26]). However, a great challenge in implementing this reform is determining which information is task-relevant and which is task-irrelevant. In the current study, we surveyed 183 forensic analysts to examine what they consider relevant versus irrelevant in their forensic analyses. Results revealed that analysts generally do not regard information regarding the suspect or victim as essential to their analytic tasks. However, there was significant variability among analysts within and between disciplines. Findings suggest that forensic science disciplines need to agree on what they regard as task-relevant before context management procedures can be properly implemented. The lack of consensus about what is relevant information not only leaves room for biasing information, but also reveals foundational gaps in what analysts consider crucial in forensic decision making.     

Nachbarrechtsschutz im Aussetzungsverfahren gegen eine immisionsschutzrechtliche Genehmigung für einen Schweinemaststall

Keine Zusammenfassung     

Unterliegt die Wirksamkeit der Änderung eines Flächennutzungsplanes der Inzidentprüfung, hat der Planbetroffene Anspruch darauf, dass nicht nur die von ihm geltend gemachten eigenen Belange, sondern auch sonstige öffentliche und private Belange gerecht abgewogen werden

Keine Zusammenfassung     

Restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of forensic science casework in the People's Republic of China.

Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis for the purpose of individualization is now being used in casework in the People's Republic of China. This report describes the use of the multilocus minisatellite probe 33.15 to solve three cases, including two homicides and a rape. In the third case, fetal tissue was analyzed to prove that the alleged rapist was, in fact, the father. In each case, analysis of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) resulted in a positive match. The probability of chance association of the DNA fingerprint was calculated as 5.6 x 10(-12), which is similar to the figures reported in the literature.