Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.1177/13657127211055230
Veljko Turanjanin
This paper is focused on several important issues that deal with special investigation measures. The main perspective of the analysis is based on the ECtHR case law on this issue. Two issues are from primary interests: secret monitoring of communication and undercover investigator. Intensive ICT development enables various modern techniques and methods of crime investigation but also results in some new types of crime that could be committed using ICT. Expansion of the fundamental rights and their protection, especially in Europe, raised global awareness of the right to privacy and the need to protect it. Having that in mind, it seems that the main question that should be answered by legislator is: Where is the borderline between the right to privacy and the public interest to investigate or prevent crime and collect evidence? The undercover investigator falls under Article 6 of the Convention and there are different rules on the admissibility of such evidence. Serbian Criminal Procedure Law on some points is in line with ECtHR standards, but some very important provisions, as well as practice, are not.
{"title":"Special investigative measures: Comparison of the Serbian Criminal Procedure Code with the European Court of Human Rights Standards","authors":"Veljko Turanjanin","doi":"10.1177/13657127211055230","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127211055230","url":null,"abstract":"This paper is focused on several important issues that deal with special investigation measures. The main perspective of the analysis is based on the ECtHR case law on this issue. Two issues are from primary interests: secret monitoring of communication and undercover investigator. Intensive ICT development enables various modern techniques and methods of crime investigation but also results in some new types of crime that could be committed using ICT. Expansion of the fundamental rights and their protection, especially in Europe, raised global awareness of the right to privacy and the need to protect it. Having that in mind, it seems that the main question that should be answered by legislator is: Where is the borderline between the right to privacy and the public interest to investigate or prevent crime and collect evidence? The undercover investigator falls under Article 6 of the Convention and there are different rules on the admissibility of such evidence. Serbian Criminal Procedure Law on some points is in line with ECtHR standards, but some very important provisions, as well as practice, are not.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"26 1","pages":"34 - 60"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49109021","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-30DOI: 10.1177/13657127211070331
Susana Costa
The introduction of biological evidence in judicial settings raises particular modes of entanglement between professional cultures and perceptions of the probative value of evidence. When DNA evidence reaches court, it also challenges the perceived margins of critical assessment of the work and understandings of previous links in the chain of custody, like the criminal police, forensic experts and the public prosecution services. Given the apparent neutrality of judicial institutions, how do Portuguese judges perceive and value biological evidence? And how do judges see their articulation with other operators of the criminal justice system? An analysis of 14 interviews carried out with Portuguese judges reveals the challenges in the evaluation of biological evidence, which is characterised as a ‘safe haven’, grounded as it is on an indisputable scientific authority. The suggestion of the presence of a cultural rift emerges, which, taken with the work of other epistemic cultures, leads to biological evidence being seen as ‘ready-made evidence’ on its arrival in court, thus limiting the role of judges in its appraisal.
{"title":"DNA as ‘ready-made evidence’: An analysis of Portuguese judges’ views","authors":"Susana Costa","doi":"10.1177/13657127211070331","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127211070331","url":null,"abstract":"The introduction of biological evidence in judicial settings raises particular modes of entanglement between professional cultures and perceptions of the probative value of evidence. When DNA evidence reaches court, it also challenges the perceived margins of critical assessment of the work and understandings of previous links in the chain of custody, like the criminal police, forensic experts and the public prosecution services. Given the apparent neutrality of judicial institutions, how do Portuguese judges perceive and value biological evidence? And how do judges see their articulation with other operators of the criminal justice system? An analysis of 14 interviews carried out with Portuguese judges reveals the challenges in the evaluation of biological evidence, which is characterised as a ‘safe haven’, grounded as it is on an indisputable scientific authority. The suggestion of the presence of a cultural rift emerges, which, taken with the work of other epistemic cultures, leads to biological evidence being seen as ‘ready-made evidence’ on its arrival in court, thus limiting the role of judges in its appraisal.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"26 1","pages":"121 - 135"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46108640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-15DOI: 10.1177/13657127211064355
M. McConville, L. Marsh
Abstract This article, focusing on the issue of custody time limits litigated under Covid-19 conditions, sets out how reasoned decisions to refuse to extend custody for unconvicted defendants excited the disapproval of senior judges such that fundamental changes were made to evidence, procedure and proof as well as effecting permanent manipulation of the composition of the adjudicating panels authorised to deal with such cases. This additionally raises fundamental questions about the administration and governance of the courts, the independence of the judiciary in decision-making and the basic utility of the presumption of innocence in such cases.
{"title":"Resuscitating criminal courts after Covid-19: Trialling a cure worse than the disease","authors":"M. McConville, L. Marsh","doi":"10.1177/13657127211064355","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127211064355","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article, focusing on the issue of custody time limits litigated under Covid-19 conditions, sets out how reasoned decisions to refuse to extend custody for unconvicted defendants excited the disapproval of senior judges such that fundamental changes were made to evidence, procedure and proof as well as effecting permanent manipulation of the composition of the adjudicating panels authorised to deal with such cases. This additionally raises fundamental questions about the administration and governance of the courts, the independence of the judiciary in decision-making and the basic utility of the presumption of innocence in such cases.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"26 1","pages":"103 - 120"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43465038","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1177/13657127211060555
Jack Murphy
The greatest hurdle to an effective criminal justice response to human trafficking is the prevalence of myths about how exploitation happens and who ‘counts’ as a genuine victim. This includes the myth that, to be a genuine victim, an individual must have been subject to some form of physical restraint. Previous work has demonstrated how this myth undermines trafficking prosecutions in various jurisdictions. It has demonstrated that, in the absence of physical restraint during their exploitation, victims are deemed to lack credibility. However, what is missing in the current body literature is a robust analysis of whether something should be done to address this issue. By engaging with the foundational principle of accurate fact-finding, this article argues that some form of regulation of cross-examination in the English and Welsh jurisdiction, with a view to preventing this myth from manifesting in trials, would be justified.
{"title":"Combating the ‘myth of physical restraint’ in human trafficking and modern slavery trials heard in the Crown Court","authors":"Jack Murphy","doi":"10.1177/13657127211060555","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127211060555","url":null,"abstract":"The greatest hurdle to an effective criminal justice response to human trafficking is the prevalence of myths about how exploitation happens and who ‘counts’ as a genuine victim. This includes the myth that, to be a genuine victim, an individual must have been subject to some form of physical restraint. Previous work has demonstrated how this myth undermines trafficking prosecutions in various jurisdictions. It has demonstrated that, in the absence of physical restraint during their exploitation, victims are deemed to lack credibility. However, what is missing in the current body literature is a robust analysis of whether something should be done to address this issue. By engaging with the foundational principle of accurate fact-finding, this article argues that some form of regulation of cross-examination in the English and Welsh jurisdiction, with a view to preventing this myth from manifesting in trials, would be justified.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"26 1","pages":"3 - 19"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48901332","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1177/13657127211051771
Zhiyuan Guo
Psychiatric evaluation is widely used in criminal cases to screen people with mental disorder because insanity can either exempt the offender from criminal responsibility or mitigate his/her criminal punishment. The operation of psychiatric evaluation in China used to carry a typical characteristic of civil law tradition, but recent reforms have strengthened the procedural safeguards for psychiatric evaluation and stressed the requirement of its presentation and examination in criminal trials. This article will explore how psychiatric evaluation is conducted, and how the expert opinion is presented and examined as evidence in criminal trials in China. Part I will give a historical overview of psychiatric evaluation in China's criminal cases. Part II will introduce the current legislation on psychiatric evaluation in China. Part III will explore problems with current legislation and practice. In this part, high-profile cases will be cited to illustrate loopholes in the psychiatric evaluation law and practical problems with the operation of evaluation. Potential solutions to these loopholes or problems will also be explored. Part IV will focus on the presentation and examination of psychiatrists’ expert opinion in criminal trials. Although expert witnesses are also required to testify before the court in China, very few of them take the stand in practice. This part will discuss why reforms kept failing and what should be done to bring expert witnesses to court. Psychiatrists are important expert witnesses; the discussion of live psychiatrists will shed light on the appearance of all the expert witnesses in Chinese criminal trials.
{"title":"Psychiatric Evaluation in Chinese Criminal Proceedings:A Legal Perspective","authors":"Zhiyuan Guo","doi":"10.1177/13657127211051771","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127211051771","url":null,"abstract":"Psychiatric evaluation is widely used in criminal cases to screen people with mental disorder because insanity can either exempt the offender from criminal responsibility or mitigate his/her criminal punishment. The operation of psychiatric evaluation in China used to carry a typical characteristic of civil law tradition, but recent reforms have strengthened the procedural safeguards for psychiatric evaluation and stressed the requirement of its presentation and examination in criminal trials. This article will explore how psychiatric evaluation is conducted, and how the expert opinion is presented and examined as evidence in criminal trials in China. Part I will give a historical overview of psychiatric evaluation in China's criminal cases. Part II will introduce the current legislation on psychiatric evaluation in China. Part III will explore problems with current legislation and practice. In this part, high-profile cases will be cited to illustrate loopholes in the psychiatric evaluation law and practical problems with the operation of evaluation. Potential solutions to these loopholes or problems will also be explored. Part IV will focus on the presentation and examination of psychiatrists’ expert opinion in criminal trials. Although expert witnesses are also required to testify before the court in China, very few of them take the stand in practice. This part will discuss why reforms kept failing and what should be done to bring expert witnesses to court. Psychiatrists are important expert witnesses; the discussion of live psychiatrists will shed light on the appearance of all the expert witnesses in Chinese criminal trials.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"26 1","pages":"81 - 99"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44518165","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1177/13657127211060556
Sarah L. Deck, Martine B. Powell, J. Goodman-Delahunty, Nina J Westera
Cases of historic child assault typically rely on the complainant's narrative due to lack of corroborating evidence. Although it is important that complainants give their best evidence, concern has been expressed that evidence-sharing procedures are suboptimal. This study explored criminal justice professionals’ perspectives on the utility of introducing reforms to the evidence-sharing process. We interviewed judges, prosecutors, defence counsel and witness assistance officers (N = 43) on the utility of regulating the questioning of complainants and of using video-recorded interviews as evidence-in-chief. Many professionals perceived that adult complainants of child assault were vulnerable and supported reforms to evidence-sharing. Primary objections to these reforms were the belief that all adult complainants should share evidence in the same way and the poor quality of investigative interviews. This study illuminates potential barriers to the implementation of reforms which would change how adult complainants of child assault give evidence.
{"title":"Are all complainants of sexual assault vulnerable? Views of Australian criminal justice professionals on the evidence-sharing process","authors":"Sarah L. Deck, Martine B. Powell, J. Goodman-Delahunty, Nina J Westera","doi":"10.1177/13657127211060556","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127211060556","url":null,"abstract":"Cases of historic child assault typically rely on the complainant's narrative due to lack of corroborating evidence. Although it is important that complainants give their best evidence, concern has been expressed that evidence-sharing procedures are suboptimal. This study explored criminal justice professionals’ perspectives on the utility of introducing reforms to the evidence-sharing process. We interviewed judges, prosecutors, defence counsel and witness assistance officers (N = 43) on the utility of regulating the questioning of complainants and of using video-recorded interviews as evidence-in-chief. Many professionals perceived that adult complainants of child assault were vulnerable and supported reforms to evidence-sharing. Primary objections to these reforms were the belief that all adult complainants should share evidence in the same way and the poor quality of investigative interviews. This study illuminates potential barriers to the implementation of reforms which would change how adult complainants of child assault give evidence.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"26 1","pages":"20 - 33"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43798555","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1177/13657127211055232
Joan Pico i Junoy, J. López
In professional negotiations between lawyers, it is usual to share information, data and documents that could be protected with legal privilege. This paper analyses, from a comparative perspective, the possible evidentiary use of the documents that a lawyer obtains from the opposing lawyer in a subsequent judicial process. A conflict is presented here between two fundamental procedural guarantees: The right to evidence of the party that possesses the documents and the right to defence and legal privilege of the party that delivered them in the prior negotiation to the lawsuit. The solution provided by different legal systems is therefore not always straightforward, because some legal systems do protect legal privilege and others protect the right to evidence, with different solutions for the rights put in balance here.
{"title":"Private communication between lawyers as evidence in a judicial process: A comparative journey","authors":"Joan Pico i Junoy, J. López","doi":"10.1177/13657127211055232","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127211055232","url":null,"abstract":"In professional negotiations between lawyers, it is usual to share information, data and documents that could be protected with legal privilege. This paper analyses, from a comparative perspective, the possible evidentiary use of the documents that a lawyer obtains from the opposing lawyer in a subsequent judicial process. A conflict is presented here between two fundamental procedural guarantees: The right to evidence of the party that possesses the documents and the right to defence and legal privilege of the party that delivered them in the prior negotiation to the lawsuit. The solution provided by different legal systems is therefore not always straightforward, because some legal systems do protect legal privilege and others protect the right to evidence, with different solutions for the rights put in balance here.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"26 1","pages":"61 - 80"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43126140","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-01DOI: 10.1177/13657127211036175
H. Douglas, Robin Fitzgerald
Non-fatal strangulation is recognised as a common form of coercive control in violent relationships. Overwhelmingly it is perpetrated by men against women. It is dangerous both because of the immediate and serious injuries it can cause, and the risk of future violence associated with it. A discrete offence of non-fatal strangulation has been introduced in many countries. Queensland, Australia introduced a discrete non-fatal strangulation offence in 2016. While the offence is charged often, around half the non-fatal strangulation charges laid by police do not proceed. We spoke to prosecution and defence lawyers to better understand the evidential obstacles to successful prosecution. We found that the prosecution of the offence faces challenges common to family violence offences more broadly, despite it being a discrete physical act. Specifically, we found that the willingness of the victim to testify and the perception of the victim's credibility were key to successful prosecution.
{"title":"Proving non-fatal strangulation in family violence cases: A case study on the criminalisation of family violence","authors":"H. Douglas, Robin Fitzgerald","doi":"10.1177/13657127211036175","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127211036175","url":null,"abstract":"Non-fatal strangulation is recognised as a common form of coercive control in violent relationships. Overwhelmingly it is perpetrated by men against women. It is dangerous both because of the immediate and serious injuries it can cause, and the risk of future violence associated with it. A discrete offence of non-fatal strangulation has been introduced in many countries. Queensland, Australia introduced a discrete non-fatal strangulation offence in 2016. While the offence is charged often, around half the non-fatal strangulation charges laid by police do not proceed. We spoke to prosecution and defence lawyers to better understand the evidential obstacles to successful prosecution. We found that the prosecution of the offence faces challenges common to family violence offences more broadly, despite it being a discrete physical act. Specifically, we found that the willingness of the victim to testify and the perception of the victim's credibility were key to successful prosecution.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"25 1","pages":"350 - 370"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41992894","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-01DOI: 10.1177/13657127211036168
Edwin Teong Ying Keat
In Singapore, the common law doctrine of res gestae (‘RG’) risks becoming extinct given the statutory inclusions of hearsay evidence. Further, the test for RG is unsettled. This article thus argues that RG is still relevant but must be applied principally. It is relevant because first, it is unwise to uproot a doctrine existing since 1808. Second, comparative analysis of cases from United Kingdom, India, New Zealand and Australia evinces the residual need for RG. Third, a modified approach to applying it can in fact exclude inadmissible evidence. This article further proposes a three-strand test. First, as a preliminary requirement, objectively, there was no concoction involved. Second, the evidence must relate to a fact-forming part of the same transaction but was not contemplated in s. 32(1) of the Evidence Act. Third, the evidence must have sufficient probative value to outweigh its prejudicial effect.
{"title":"Whither, hither and thither, Res Gestae? A comparative analysis of its relevance and application","authors":"Edwin Teong Ying Keat","doi":"10.1177/13657127211036168","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127211036168","url":null,"abstract":"In Singapore, the common law doctrine of res gestae (‘RG’) risks becoming extinct given the statutory inclusions of hearsay evidence. Further, the test for RG is unsettled. This article thus argues that RG is still relevant but must be applied principally. It is relevant because first, it is unwise to uproot a doctrine existing since 1808. Second, comparative analysis of cases from United Kingdom, India, New Zealand and Australia evinces the residual need for RG. Third, a modified approach to applying it can in fact exclude inadmissible evidence. This article further proposes a three-strand test. First, as a preliminary requirement, objectively, there was no concoction involved. Second, the evidence must relate to a fact-forming part of the same transaction but was not contemplated in s. 32(1) of the Evidence Act. Third, the evidence must have sufficient probative value to outweigh its prejudicial effect.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"25 1","pages":"326 - 349"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49410267","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-01DOI: 10.1177/13657127211046397
Michelle Mattison, P. Cooper
In England and Wales, Employment Tribunals (ETs) hear claims from persons who believe that an employer, or potential employer, has treated them unlawfully. Witness statements form part of the evidence considered by ETs, but research is lacking with regard to the methods used to produce ET witness statements. This study presents the findings from 40 semi-structured interviews with ET judges, panel members, employment lawyers (solicitors, barristers, advisers) and litigants. Our data revealed six themes: professional processes, enabling through case management, presentation preferences, challenges for litigants in person, availability and quality of resources, and lack of training. Participants felt that the quality of witness statements varied amongst those prepared by professional advisors and by litigants in person. Our interviews revealed almost no evidence of practitioner training on how best to prepare a witness statement. We make recommendations about guidance and training for those tasked with drafting witness statements.
{"title":"Witness Statements for Employment Tribunals in England and Wales: What are the ‘Issues’?","authors":"Michelle Mattison, P. Cooper","doi":"10.1177/13657127211046397","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127211046397","url":null,"abstract":"In England and Wales, Employment Tribunals (ETs) hear claims from persons who believe that an employer, or potential employer, has treated them unlawfully. Witness statements form part of the evidence considered by ETs, but research is lacking with regard to the methods used to produce ET witness statements. This study presents the findings from 40 semi-structured interviews with ET judges, panel members, employment lawyers (solicitors, barristers, advisers) and litigants. Our data revealed six themes: professional processes, enabling through case management, presentation preferences, challenges for litigants in person, availability and quality of resources, and lack of training. Participants felt that the quality of witness statements varied amongst those prepared by professional advisors and by litigants in person. Our interviews revealed almost no evidence of practitioner training on how best to prepare a witness statement. We make recommendations about guidance and training for those tasked with drafting witness statements.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"25 1","pages":"286 - 306"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47904868","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：