Evidence marshaling software MarshalPlan
Friday, June 19, 2015
Thursday, June 18, 2015
Case Study: An Exoneration Campaign
A double murder. Life in prison for 2 N.J. men. But did they do it?
Inside the fight to free 2 N.J. men serving life for murder
Evidence marshaling software MarshalPlan
Thursday, June 11, 2015
Sad news: Death of Mike Redmayne
Shocking news of the death of LSE's Mike Redmayne, a truly gifted scholar and a truly fine person:
Evidence marshaling software MarshalPlan
Wednesday, June 10, 2015
Apologies as Evidence
Faculty argues there is no good evidence apologies law would work Scottish Legal News (June 10, 2015):
The Faculty of Advocates has raised a fundamental question over planned legislation for Scotland which aims to alter attitudes to apologising – where is the evidence from anywhere in the world that such laws are an effective means of bringing about the desired change?
Under the Apologies (Scotland) Bill, an apology would be inadmissible in most civil litigation as evidence of liability and could not be used in any other way to the prejudice of the apologising person.
An “apology” in terms of the bill is a statement that someone is sorry about or regrets something, whether an act, omission or outcome. An admission of fault or statements of fact within the apology qualify as part of the apology itself.
David Stephenson QC, for the Faculty, took part in a round-table discussion of the bill before the Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament. Witnesses were asked whether the bill was a good thing or a bad thing.
...
Mr Stephenson cited a major review in 2014 which had considered the impact of such laws in countries like America, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.
The paper, by Professor Robyn Carroll, had stated: “The limited research available does not show that apology legislation has worked as a ‘magic wand’. To the contrary, the little data that exists as to the shift in behaviour of potential apologisers, from the field of medical practice, tells us that the legislation has been relatively ineffective.”
Mr Stephenson added: “On what basis are we to be convinced that sufficient benefit would accrue to take away existing rights and limit what courts may look at when they try to determine the truth of what happened?”
Mr Stephenson imagined a letter written by a husband to his wife, apologising for assaulting her and their children.
“Does anyone seriously believe that that letter, because it starts with the word ‘sorry’, should be inadmissible in legal proceedings…relating to the care of the children or protection of that woman from her husband?”
Saturday, June 06, 2015
Scientific Theories & Empirical Verification
A suggestive - but, alas, only suggestive - discussion of the relationship in modern physics between empirical verification and theoretical models. The question arises because some of today's physicists posit some entities (e.g., the other universes of multiverse theory) that are not (directly?) observable.
Adam Frank & Marcelo Gleiser:
A Crisis at the Edge of Physics
NYTimes (Op., June 5, 2015)
Friday, June 05, 2015
Kudos to Jennifer Mnookin (and UCLA)
Evidence marshaling software MarshalPlan
Wednesday, June 03, 2015
Paper: Fabrication of Facts
My paper P. TILERS, THE FABRICATION OF FACTS IN INVESTIGATION AND ADJUDICATION was recently published in 9 Journal of Comparative Law No. 2 (2014). See http://jurisdiversitas.blogspot.com/2015/05/journal-2014-92-journal-of-comparative.html
See also the SSRN preprint at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=962241
The preprint is also available on my web site at http://tillers.net/fabrication.html
Monday, June 01, 2015
Publicize or Perish
Noam Scheiber, Beyond Publish or Perish, Academic Papers Look to Make a Splash NYTimes (May 31, 2015):
[M]any social scientists have observed that their disciplines, which once regarded the ability to attract attention with suspicion, increasingly reward it.
...
[T]he benefits to academics of generating media attention may be subtly skewing their research. “The pressure is tremendous,” said James Heckman, an economist at the University of Chicago and the winner of aNobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science. “Many young economists realize that they win a MacArthur or the Clark prize, or both, by being featured in The Times.”
...
All of this has led to a new model of disseminating social science research through the media. Several economists at top departments said colleagues were now tailoring and pitching their academic papers to journalists, rather than writing papers and allowing the news media to discover them on their own.
One danger is that many journalists are not equipped to distinguish good science from shoddy science. That is a particular risk when the work does not wend its way through the usual academic channels before entering the news media’s consciousness.
Monday, May 11, 2015
Question about Waiver of Privilege Against Self-Icrimination
Both sides rest after jury is told Boston Marathon bomber is 'sorry' USA Today
Sunday, May 10, 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
