对抗性审判中的复原力建设:证人、特别措施和口头原则

IF 1.4 2区 社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Social & Legal Studies Pub Date : 2023-09-16 DOI:10.1177/09646639231201913
Samantha Fairclough
{"title":"对抗性审判中的复原力建设:证人、特别措施和口头原则","authors":"Samantha Fairclough","doi":"10.1177/09646639231201913","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using Fineman's vulnerability theory, this paper argues that the traditional adversarial approach to examining witnesses in criminal trials – premised on the principle of orality – reduces the resilience of those giving evidence. This is because the adversarial setting often leaves those testifying in a heightened state of stress, reducing the quality and reliability of their evidence as a result. In turn, this traditional approach to securing oral witness testimony in criminal trials loses resilience, in that it becomes more difficult to justify as the general approach. The use of special measures – to adjust the way testimony is given and ameliorate some of the associated stressors – provides resilience to the individual testifying, the robustness of their evidence, and the safety of consequent criminal verdicts. The positive effects special measures yield therefore lend additional resilience to our commitment to the principle of orality and the principles upon which it rests. This article concludes that the State should maximise such resilience-building through more generous special measures provision.","PeriodicalId":47163,"journal":{"name":"Social & Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resilience-building in Adversarial Trials: Witnesses, Special Measures and the Principle of Orality\",\"authors\":\"Samantha Fairclough\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09646639231201913\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Using Fineman's vulnerability theory, this paper argues that the traditional adversarial approach to examining witnesses in criminal trials – premised on the principle of orality – reduces the resilience of those giving evidence. This is because the adversarial setting often leaves those testifying in a heightened state of stress, reducing the quality and reliability of their evidence as a result. In turn, this traditional approach to securing oral witness testimony in criminal trials loses resilience, in that it becomes more difficult to justify as the general approach. The use of special measures – to adjust the way testimony is given and ameliorate some of the associated stressors – provides resilience to the individual testifying, the robustness of their evidence, and the safety of consequent criminal verdicts. The positive effects special measures yield therefore lend additional resilience to our commitment to the principle of orality and the principles upon which it rests. This article concludes that the State should maximise such resilience-building through more generous special measures provision.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47163,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social & Legal Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social & Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639231201913\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social & Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639231201913","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文运用法恩曼的脆弱性理论,认为在刑事审判中,以口头原则为前提的传统对抗性证人审查方法降低了举证者的复原力。这是因为对抗性的环境往往使证人处于高度紧张的状态,从而降低了证据的质量和可靠性。反过来,这种在刑事审判中确保口头证人证词的传统方法失去了弹性,因为它变得更加难以证明作为一般方法是合理的。特别措施的使用——调整提供证词的方式和改善一些相关的压力源——为个人作证提供了弹性,使他们的证据更加有力,并使随后的刑事判决更加安全。因此,特别措施产生的积极影响使我们对道德原则及其所依据的原则的承诺具有更大的韧性。这条的结论是,国家应通过提供更慷慨的特别措施,最大限度地提高这种复原力建设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Resilience-building in Adversarial Trials: Witnesses, Special Measures and the Principle of Orality
Using Fineman's vulnerability theory, this paper argues that the traditional adversarial approach to examining witnesses in criminal trials – premised on the principle of orality – reduces the resilience of those giving evidence. This is because the adversarial setting often leaves those testifying in a heightened state of stress, reducing the quality and reliability of their evidence as a result. In turn, this traditional approach to securing oral witness testimony in criminal trials loses resilience, in that it becomes more difficult to justify as the general approach. The use of special measures – to adjust the way testimony is given and ameliorate some of the associated stressors – provides resilience to the individual testifying, the robustness of their evidence, and the safety of consequent criminal verdicts. The positive effects special measures yield therefore lend additional resilience to our commitment to the principle of orality and the principles upon which it rests. This article concludes that the State should maximise such resilience-building through more generous special measures provision.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: SOCIAL & LEGAL STUDIES was founded in 1992 to develop progressive, interdisciplinary and critical approaches towards socio-legal study. At the heart of the journal has been a commitment towards feminist, post-colonialist, and socialist economic perspectives on law. These remain core animating principles. We aim to create an intellectual space where diverse traditions and critical approaches within legal study meet. We particularly welcome work in new fields of socio-legal study, as well as non-Western scholarship.
期刊最新文献
Book Review: Insecure Guardians: Enforcement, Encounters and Everyday Policing in Postcolonial Karachi by ZOHA WASEEM Book Review: Decolonisation and Legal Knowledge: Reflections on Power and Possibility by FOLUKE ADEBISI Everyday Healthcare Regulation: British Newspapers and Complementary and Alternative Medicine The Revolving Door of Im/Migration: Canadian Refugee Protection and the Production of Migrant Workers Legal Change and Legal Mobilisation: What Does Strategic Litigation Mean for Workers and Trade Unions?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1