Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17521483.2021.1875602
A. Fijalkowski
ABSTRACT This article centres on an unconventional figure. Tadeusz Cyprian (1898–1979) was not only an outstanding lawyer but also a talented photographer. He contributed to the documentation of nazi crimes during WW2. Cyprian was a prosecutor before the Supreme National Tribunal (Najwyższy Trybunał Narodowy), and one of the four Polish delegates at the Nuremberg Trials. My investigation concerns the issue of responsibility for crimes committed by the Germans during WW2 from the perspective of Cyprian as prosecutor and as photographer. Illustrations loom large in the article, and still more so in the whole study, given the aims of the research. The research method that is presented here is not often used by lawyers for methodological reasons. Yet law is not a system detached from external reality. Legal research and the interpretation of the law should be conducted in an interdisciplinary way. My article is divided into four parts: (1) the theoretical and contextual framework; (2) key episodes in Cyprian's biography; (3) the dispensing of justice in Poland; and (4) the individual behind the legal principle of the punishment and prevention of genocide. The value of the first part consists, inter alia, in its highlighting of the importance of interdisciplinary research. This is especially relevant for legal biographical studies, for examining the functioning of a specific court, for its judges and for the specific category of trials.
{"title":"Tadeusz Cyprian: Polish war crimes prosecutor and photographer","authors":"A. Fijalkowski","doi":"10.1080/17521483.2021.1875602","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2021.1875602","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article centres on an unconventional figure. Tadeusz Cyprian (1898–1979) was not only an outstanding lawyer but also a talented photographer. He contributed to the documentation of nazi crimes during WW2. Cyprian was a prosecutor before the Supreme National Tribunal (Najwyższy Trybunał Narodowy), and one of the four Polish delegates at the Nuremberg Trials. My investigation concerns the issue of responsibility for crimes committed by the Germans during WW2 from the perspective of Cyprian as prosecutor and as photographer. Illustrations loom large in the article, and still more so in the whole study, given the aims of the research. The research method that is presented here is not often used by lawyers for methodological reasons. Yet law is not a system detached from external reality. Legal research and the interpretation of the law should be conducted in an interdisciplinary way. My article is divided into four parts: (1) the theoretical and contextual framework; (2) key episodes in Cyprian's biography; (3) the dispensing of justice in Poland; and (4) the individual behind the legal principle of the punishment and prevention of genocide. The value of the first part consists, inter alia, in its highlighting of the importance of interdisciplinary research. This is especially relevant for legal biographical studies, for examining the functioning of a specific court, for its judges and for the specific category of trials.","PeriodicalId":42313,"journal":{"name":"Law and Humanities","volume":"15 1","pages":"47 - 83"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17521483.2021.1875602","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46464640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-01DOI: 10.1080/17521483.2020.1847455
A. Adair
ABSTRACT This study examines the introductions to the earliest surviving English law codes: those of Æthelberht (d. 616), Hlothere and Eadric (d. 685 & ?686) and Wihtred (d. 725) of Kent, and Ine (d. 726) and Alfred (d. 899) of Wessex. It argues that these texts address in thoughtful and imaginative ways significant questions of legal and royal authority, legislative legitimation, and the place of newly-written law within its legal tradition. Despite two centuries of apparent legislative silence between the short prefaces of the early kings and the lengthy preface to the domboc of King Alfred, the rhetorical projects of these texts are linked by a number shared concerns – and particularly by their historiographical approach to the development of legal authority. Though the early legal prefaces have rarely been at the centre of jurisprudential or literary critical interest, their development of legal authority via the potency of literary composition represents an important aspect of a broader literary and legal culture in early England.
{"title":"Narratives of authority: the earliest Old English law-code prefaces","authors":"A. Adair","doi":"10.1080/17521483.2020.1847455","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2020.1847455","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study examines the introductions to the earliest surviving English law codes: those of Æthelberht (d. 616), Hlothere and Eadric (d. 685 & ?686) and Wihtred (d. 725) of Kent, and Ine (d. 726) and Alfred (d. 899) of Wessex. It argues that these texts address in thoughtful and imaginative ways significant questions of legal and royal authority, legislative legitimation, and the place of newly-written law within its legal tradition. Despite two centuries of apparent legislative silence between the short prefaces of the early kings and the lengthy preface to the domboc of King Alfred, the rhetorical projects of these texts are linked by a number shared concerns – and particularly by their historiographical approach to the development of legal authority. Though the early legal prefaces have rarely been at the centre of jurisprudential or literary critical interest, their development of legal authority via the potency of literary composition represents an important aspect of a broader literary and legal culture in early England.","PeriodicalId":42313,"journal":{"name":"Law and Humanities","volume":"15 1","pages":"4 - 24"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17521483.2020.1847455","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45745830","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/17521483.2020.1801137
D. Barnard, K. D. Meyer
ABSTRACT The Justice Syndicate (TJS) is an interactive performance, featuring an audience who become jurors considering a difficult case. Via iPads, participants receive evidence, witness testimonies and prompts to vote and discuss the case. We compare TJS to other theatre performances in which audiences are juries, arguing it is unique in only having twelve audience members, with no additional spectators. We compare TJS to experiments researching jury decision-making. In its novel use of technology, it offers a scalable method to research group decision-making in jury-style settings, or to give legal practitioners and prospective jurors an experience of the psychological factors affecting jury deliberation. We discuss how different juries can be presented with identical evidence and come to opposing verdicts. We argue that these wildly different outcomes are linked to how the participants – individually and as a group – resolve the tension between what is legal and what is just.
{"title":"The Justice Syndicate: how interactive theatre provides a window into jury decision making and the public understanding of law","authors":"D. Barnard, K. D. Meyer","doi":"10.1080/17521483.2020.1801137","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2020.1801137","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Justice Syndicate (TJS) is an interactive performance, featuring an audience who become jurors considering a difficult case. Via iPads, participants receive evidence, witness testimonies and prompts to vote and discuss the case. We compare TJS to other theatre performances in which audiences are juries, arguing it is unique in only having twelve audience members, with no additional spectators. We compare TJS to experiments researching jury decision-making. In its novel use of technology, it offers a scalable method to research group decision-making in jury-style settings, or to give legal practitioners and prospective jurors an experience of the psychological factors affecting jury deliberation. We discuss how different juries can be presented with identical evidence and come to opposing verdicts. We argue that these wildly different outcomes are linked to how the participants – individually and as a group – resolve the tension between what is legal and what is just.","PeriodicalId":42313,"journal":{"name":"Law and Humanities","volume":"14 1","pages":"212 - 243"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17521483.2020.1801137","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46976305","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/17521483.2020.1821989
Gary Watt, D. Gurnham
Like almost all meetings to have taken place since the onset of COVID-19, the Law and Humanities roundtable of July 2020 took place online – this fact taking on some significance given that the foc...
{"title":"Law and Humanities issue 14.2","authors":"Gary Watt, D. Gurnham","doi":"10.1080/17521483.2020.1821989","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2020.1821989","url":null,"abstract":"Like almost all meetings to have taken place since the onset of COVID-19, the Law and Humanities roundtable of July 2020 took place online – this fact taking on some significance given that the foc...","PeriodicalId":42313,"journal":{"name":"Law and Humanities","volume":"14 1","pages":"131 - 134"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17521483.2020.1821989","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48015009","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/17521483.2020.1774100
Sophie Doherty
This exhibition review provides an original analysis of Ruth Maxwell's Not Consent exhibition as a method of challenging rape myths in Ireland. A 2018 rape trial in Cork attracted international att...
{"title":"Exhibition review: a reflection on Ruth Maxwell’s Not Consent exhibition as a method of challenging rape myths in Ireland","authors":"Sophie Doherty","doi":"10.1080/17521483.2020.1774100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2020.1774100","url":null,"abstract":"This exhibition review provides an original analysis of Ruth Maxwell's Not Consent exhibition as a method of challenging rape myths in Ireland. A 2018 rape trial in Cork attracted international att...","PeriodicalId":42313,"journal":{"name":"Law and Humanities","volume":"14 1","pages":"273 - 281"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17521483.2020.1774100","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49549012","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/17521483.2020.1821988
J. Snape
‘There are, of course, a multitude of English legal histories that might be written. What follows is just a few’. (22.) Thus, perceptively and playfully, does Ian Ward begin his subtle, large-scale...
{"title":"English legal histories","authors":"J. Snape","doi":"10.1080/17521483.2020.1821988","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2020.1821988","url":null,"abstract":"‘There are, of course, a multitude of English legal histories that might be written. What follows is just a few’. (22.) Thus, perceptively and playfully, does Ian Ward begin his subtle, large-scale...","PeriodicalId":42313,"journal":{"name":"Law and Humanities","volume":"14 1","pages":"267 - 272"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17521483.2020.1821988","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46231696","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/17521483.2020.1801950
M. Gillis
ABSTRACT This article examines the legislative measures imposed by governments as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic and scrutinizes, in particular, governments’ extensive use of military metaphors to justify those measures. It argues that while the use of military metaphors can usefully and desirably function to mobilize widespread acceptance and compliance with the relevant legislative measures and to motivate action, the use of metaphors in this way should nonetheless be viewed with caution. Metaphors of war and associated images are emotionally powerful and can function in a way that makes it difficult to question governmental responses and responsibility.
{"title":"Ventilators, missiles, doctors, troops … the justification of legislative responses to COVID-19 through military metaphors","authors":"M. Gillis","doi":"10.1080/17521483.2020.1801950","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2020.1801950","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines the legislative measures imposed by governments as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic and scrutinizes, in particular, governments’ extensive use of military metaphors to justify those measures. It argues that while the use of military metaphors can usefully and desirably function to mobilize widespread acceptance and compliance with the relevant legislative measures and to motivate action, the use of metaphors in this way should nonetheless be viewed with caution. Metaphors of war and associated images are emotionally powerful and can function in a way that makes it difficult to question governmental responses and responsibility.","PeriodicalId":42313,"journal":{"name":"Law and Humanities","volume":"14 1","pages":"135 - 159"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17521483.2020.1801950","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43404757","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/17521483.2020.1814004
G. Liveley, R. Shaw
ABSTRACT This article seeks to break new ground by adopting an innovative methodology – a legal-narratological approach – in order to take a fresh look at the narrative dynamics and narrative tiers of a two-thousand-year-old piece of marriage legislation – the late first century BCE leges Iuliae. We argue that these Roman laws, which brought hitherto private behaviours into the public jurisdiction and state control, sought to establish its legal authority as a new normative framework through the lawmaker’s overt manipulation of the law qua narrative. In particular, we submit that it is through the explicit representation of the marriage legislation as a new chapter in an ancient cultural narrative that Augustus attempts to persuade the Roman senate and people of the constitutional validity of his radical legal reforms. We further propose that the ultimate failure of Augustus’ marriage legislation can also be understood in terms of a failure to align this new statute with the ‘master plot’ of that wider cultural narrative.
{"title":"Marriage plots: a new narratological approach to the Augustan marriage laws","authors":"G. Liveley, R. Shaw","doi":"10.1080/17521483.2020.1814004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2020.1814004","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article seeks to break new ground by adopting an innovative methodology – a legal-narratological approach – in order to take a fresh look at the narrative dynamics and narrative tiers of a two-thousand-year-old piece of marriage legislation – the late first century BCE leges Iuliae. We argue that these Roman laws, which brought hitherto private behaviours into the public jurisdiction and state control, sought to establish its legal authority as a new normative framework through the lawmaker’s overt manipulation of the law qua narrative. In particular, we submit that it is through the explicit representation of the marriage legislation as a new chapter in an ancient cultural narrative that Augustus attempts to persuade the Roman senate and people of the constitutional validity of his radical legal reforms. We further propose that the ultimate failure of Augustus’ marriage legislation can also be understood in terms of a failure to align this new statute with the ‘master plot’ of that wider cultural narrative.","PeriodicalId":42313,"journal":{"name":"Law and Humanities","volume":"14 1","pages":"244 - 266"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17521483.2020.1814004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41391831","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/17521483.2020.1821987
Jordan A. Belor, Timothy D. Peters
ABSTRACT This paper engages in a cultural legal reading of the character Frank Castle (a.k.a ‘the Punisher’) as rendered in Netflix’s Daredevil (2015–2018) and The Punisher (2017–2019). Situated within the superhero genre, Castle is an extreme vigilante who instead of simply capturing criminals, kills them, presenting a critical interrogation of law and justice. The paper focuses on the explicit and implicit justifications presented for the Punisher’s death-dealing violence, examining not only the way he goes beyond the law but aligns to and represents modern legality. Contributing to the literature on law, superheroes and sovereignty, it argues that Castle’s malleable relationship to the law challenges the presentation of the superhero as a figure of exceptional justice. By analysing both the narrative production of death-worthiness alongside the visceral and affective responses elicited from the viewer, the paper considers the ability of a critical legal spectatorship to judge cinematic images of violence.
{"title":"Critical legal spectatorship and the affect of violence: a cultural legal reading of Netflix’s The Punisher","authors":"Jordan A. Belor, Timothy D. Peters","doi":"10.1080/17521483.2020.1821987","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2020.1821987","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper engages in a cultural legal reading of the character Frank Castle (a.k.a ‘the Punisher’) as rendered in Netflix’s Daredevil (2015–2018) and The Punisher (2017–2019). Situated within the superhero genre, Castle is an extreme vigilante who instead of simply capturing criminals, kills them, presenting a critical interrogation of law and justice. The paper focuses on the explicit and implicit justifications presented for the Punisher’s death-dealing violence, examining not only the way he goes beyond the law but aligns to and represents modern legality. Contributing to the literature on law, superheroes and sovereignty, it argues that Castle’s malleable relationship to the law challenges the presentation of the superhero as a figure of exceptional justice. By analysing both the narrative production of death-worthiness alongside the visceral and affective responses elicited from the viewer, the paper considers the ability of a critical legal spectatorship to judge cinematic images of violence.","PeriodicalId":42313,"journal":{"name":"Law and Humanities","volume":"14 1","pages":"160 - 186"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17521483.2020.1821987","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48841273","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-02DOI: 10.1080/17521483.2020.1810896
Mary Marcel
ABSTRACT Rene Girard, influential theorist of sacrifice and victimage, casts Oedipus as a scapegoat, who absorbs the ‘free-floating’ guilt that has plagued Thebes. But is he? Girard’s definitions of the scapegoat and reciprocal violence are established, and then differentiated from the administration of punishment in the stateless societies of ancient Greek myths, using the laws of Zeus and the story cycle of the Oresteia. Practices and attitudes surrounding man-boy sexual and pederastic relationships are reconstructed as they evolved from mythic into historic times in Greece. The larger story of Laius, Pelops, Chrysippus, Oedipus and Jocasta is investigated using scholarship on lost but attested plays as well as mythographic materials. By establishing Laius’s illicit abduction of Chrysippus as the source of guilt, and its treatment in tragedy in historic Athens, Oedipus emerges instead as an unwitting and unwilling agent of punishment in a stateless but not lawless society.
{"title":"Law in stateless societies: scapegoats, curses and punishers in Greek literature","authors":"Mary Marcel","doi":"10.1080/17521483.2020.1810896","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2020.1810896","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Rene Girard, influential theorist of sacrifice and victimage, casts Oedipus as a scapegoat, who absorbs the ‘free-floating’ guilt that has plagued Thebes. But is he? Girard’s definitions of the scapegoat and reciprocal violence are established, and then differentiated from the administration of punishment in the stateless societies of ancient Greek myths, using the laws of Zeus and the story cycle of the Oresteia. Practices and attitudes surrounding man-boy sexual and pederastic relationships are reconstructed as they evolved from mythic into historic times in Greece. The larger story of Laius, Pelops, Chrysippus, Oedipus and Jocasta is investigated using scholarship on lost but attested plays as well as mythographic materials. By establishing Laius’s illicit abduction of Chrysippus as the source of guilt, and its treatment in tragedy in historic Athens, Oedipus emerges instead as an unwitting and unwilling agent of punishment in a stateless but not lawless society.","PeriodicalId":42313,"journal":{"name":"Law and Humanities","volume":"14 1","pages":"187 - 211"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17521483.2020.1810896","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44748049","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：