Verdicts In Cases Research Articles

Faktor Penyebab dan Upaya Penanggulangan Disparitas Putusan Bagi Pelaku Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Seksual di Wilayah Hukum Pengadilan Negeri Kelas I A Kupang

The judge's decision is a vital aspect needed to resolve criminal cases. The judge's authority and power are so great in deciding cases that result in disparities in verdicts in cases where the weight of the crime is the same, namely cases of sexual violence against children. This research is an empirical juridical research, so the data sources used are primary data sources, secondary data sources and tertiary data sources. Primary data sources are obtained through the results of research in the field, secondary data is obtained through literature, laws, and other literature, and tertiary data is obtained through dictionaries, mass media, and the internet. The data were analyzed in a descriptive-qualitative manner. The results of the study show that: (1) the factors that cause the disparity in punishment for perpetrators of sexual violence are internal factors and external factors of judges. (2) efforts to overcome disparities in the verdicts of sexual violence crimes which include repressive efforts and preventive efforts.

Securing obligations: a reply to Hindriks

In his contribution to this special issue, Hindriks considers the Security Principle, an account of pro tanto obligations based on our account of reasons (Gunnemyr and Touborg 2023a). According to the Security Principle, you have a pro tanto obligation not to perform an action that makes a harm more secure. Hindriks raises two objections to this account. First, that it is too flexible; second, that it gives wrong verdicts when agents are robustly unwilling to act in a certain way. Here, we respond to Hindriks’ objections and argue that Hindriks’ account, the Threshold Principle, gives counterintuitive verdicts in preemption and low-probability cases.

Конституционное право на пересмотр судебного решения по уголовным делам в Донецкой Народной Республике

The article examines the peculiarities of the realization of the right of citizens to review the verdict in criminal cases in the Donetsk People’s Republic. The analysis of the activity of judicial bodies operating in the territories of these subjects is given.

Majority jury verdicts in England and Wales: a vestige of white supremacy?

In England and Wales, the requirement for a unanimous jury verdict in criminal cases was abolished in 1967, marking a significant departure from a centuries-old legal tradition. Majority verdicts are now common practice, yet no research to date explores the origins of this sudden change to the jury system. In contrast, recent research in the US uncovered a connection between the conception of majority verdicts in Louisiana and Jim Crow era law-making, finding that majority verdicts were strategically introduced to suppress the black juror vote and facilitate quicker convictions to fuel free prison labour. The US Supreme Court later outlawed majority verdicts in a case known as Ramos v. Louisiana, amid recognition of their racist origins . Adopting the critical epistemological position guiding the US research, we consider how race and class underpinned the decision to introduce majority verdicts in England and Wales. Drawing on Home Office files and other archival materials, we find that an increase in eligible jurors from different racial and class backgrounds led to a perceived decline in the ‘calibre’ of jurors – reflective of wider public anxieties about Commonwealth immigration, Black Power and white disenfranchisement. We conclude that a desire to dilute the influence of ‘coloured’ migrants on juries contributed to the introduction of majority verdicts in England and Wales.

Features of the Application of Digital Technology in Criminal Proceedings of the BRICS Countries

The current pace of technological development creates new opportunities for improvements in various spheres of human activity, including the sphere of criminal proceedings. In the BRICS countries, the achievements of modern technological developments, in particular the use of digital technology in criminal proceedings, have their own unique characteristics. This article describes the current state of criminal proceedings in the BRICS member countries. The authors analyze practices in criminal proceedings with the aim of identifying best practices, advantages and disadvantages of using digital technology in the criminal justice sector, as well as outlining prospects for the development of this technology in the BRICS countries. The authors come to the conclusion that the use of digital technology in criminal proceedings should contribute to increased access to justice, procedural economy and effective investigation, and as a result, a fair verdict in criminal cases in all of the BRICS member states.

You Just Didn't Care Enough

We refine the intuitively appealing idea that you are blameworthy for something if it happened because you did not care enough. More formally: you are blameworthy for X (where X may be an action, omission, or outcome) just in case there is the right causal-explanatory relation between your poor quality of will and X. First, we argue that blameworthiness for actions, omissions, and outcomes is concerned with negative differences: you are blameworthy for the fact that X occurred instead of X*, where X is worse than X*. Second, we argue that the way in which your quality of will is poor has to fit what you are blameworthy for. With these refinements, the account already gives intuitively correct verdicts in cases of forgetting, making a negative difference to a nevertheless good result, and doing an action with runaway consequences. We then discuss what the right causal-explanatory relation is and suggest that it is simply causation, understood in the right way. Here, we draw on the account of causation developed in Touborg, The Dual Nature of Causation. According to this account, there are two necessary and jointly sufficient conditions for causation. Roughly, C causes E rather than E* iff (a) C is process-connected to E, and (b) C makes E more secure and E* less secure. With this account of causation, our account of blameworthiness now also gives correct verdicts in omission, pre-emption, and switching cases, Frankfurt-style cases, and collective harm cases.

Criminological analysis of the identity of a fraudster in the field of misuse of electronic means of payment

The processes of digitalization and technologization developed the social relations, but also acted as a catalyst for the development of illegal activities. A typical example of a crime of this group is fraud using electronic means of payment. Based on the low detection rate of this crime, about 30 %, according to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, as well as the high degree of latency of illegal banking transactions, the optimization of preventive activities is of particular relevance, which requires research the personality of the offender. Within the framework of this article, the socio-demographic, socio-role and socio-psychological substructures of the offender’s personality are analyzed. The official statistics for the period 2013–2020 were studied, as well as the judicial practice in the amount of 115 verdicts in criminal cases for the same period. The typical gender of the offender, his age, education and territory of residence, his professional affiliation were established. The analysis of the socio-psychological substructure of the personality made it possible to produce a conclusion about the depth and stability of the criminalization of the offender, as well as his criminal motivation. As a result of a comprehensive study, a criminological portrait of the personality of a fraudster in the field of misuse of electronic means of payment was compiled, contradictions were revealed between the portraits of the personality of a general criminal fraudster and a cybercriminal formed in the doctrine of criminology with the data obtained. The results of the study can be used in the framework of improving the prevention of crimes committed using information technology in general, and the misuse of electronic means of payment, in particular.

Insanity as a defence to a criminal charge

Richard Griffith, Senior Lecturer in Health Law at Swansea University, considers the availability of the special verdict and common law insanity defence in cases where a person with a mental disorder faces a criminal charge.

ANALISIS HUKUM PENYERTAAN “DELLNEMING” DALAM PENEGAKAN HUKUM PIDANA PEMILU : EVALUASI PEMILU 2019 DAN PROYEKSI PEMILU 2024

The general elections and elections in 2024 will be the first experiences because they will be held concurrently in the same year. Reflecting on the implementation of the 2019 elections, the Integrated Law Enforcement Center's (Gakkumdu) discussion of problems has a significant impact on the process of enforcing the Election Criminal Law. The issue stems from the process of completing the elements of election crime. Substantive law enforcement is important to put forward, considering that, empirically, in the 2019 elections, it has produced a precedent in the application of the "deelneming" articles of inclusion. This is evident from the analysis of the tendency of decisions by judges who handed down guilty verdicts in cases involving the application of the inclusion article elements (deelneming). One of the Election Supervisory Agency's (Bawaslu) top priorities as they prepare for the 2024 General Election is to strengthen the Integrated Law Enforcement Center (Gakkumdu). The Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) makes breakthroughs in optimizing the enforcement of election criminal law as one of the elements in the Gakkumdu center, alongside the police and the prosecutor's office. One aspect is related to conducting scientific studies and increasing HR capacity in the process of enforcing election criminal law.

Prevalence estimates as priors: Juror characteristics, perceived base rates, and verdicts in cases reliant on complainant and defendant testimony

AbstractJurors often have to make decisions about whether they believe a complainant's or defendant's account of an event. However, the relative ambiguity of cues in testimony creates a situation where juror evaluations can vary significantly. As a result, in cases heavily reliant on testimony there is a particular likelihood that juror characteristics will be associated with verdicts, and it is important to understand these associations. This research investigates the relationships between two juror characteristics—gender and cultural worldviews—and verdicts in two such cases, and the potential for those relationships to be explained by differences in perceived prevalence of alleged events acting as prior probability judgements. As predicted, results show significant relationships between gender and cultural worldview and verdicts and show that these relationships are mediated by differences in underlying prevalence estimates. These findings have important implications for understanding associations between juror characteristics and verdicts, and related policy.

Perioperative Pharmacologic Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism: A Professional Liability Analysis.

Fear of medical liability is a major driver for broad administration of perioperative prophylactic anticoagulation, despite the persistently low rates of clinically symptomatic venous thromboembolism events (VTE) postoperatively. This study was undertaken to evaluate the medicolegal landscape of perioperative VTE and its pharmaceutical prophylaxis. The Westlaw legal database was retrospectively searched for verdicts in medical professional liability cases in the United States between 2009 and 2020. One search strategy focused on perioperative VTE, and a second on claims of hemorrhagic complications in patients receiving perioperative anticoagulation. The search for VTE revealed 129 cases, and the search for hemorrhagic complications identified 24 cases. Almost half of the VTE cases were brought following orthopedic surgery (49%), and 29% following general surgery. The most common claims were failure to diagnose and treat during hospital stay or after discharge (74%), and failure to prescribe/administer anticoagulation (46%). Verdict for the health care professional (i.e., the defendant) was reached in 75% of cases. The median payout for patient verdicts was 1,213,644 USD (interquartile range 1,014,100; 150,000-7,700,000). Of hemorrhagic complication cases, 42% occurred in patients receiving VTE prophylaxis. In these cases, 82% resulted in a defendant verdict. Reasons for in-court medical professional liability claims involving perioperative VTE were mainly failure to diagnose VTE and rescue patients from complications postoperatively. The high rate of defendant verdicts supports the notion that decisions on VTE prophylaxis should not be influenced by fear of liability.

A Truly Robust Signal Temporal Logic: Monitoring Safety Properties of Interacting Cyber-Physical Systems under Uncertain Observation

Signal Temporal Logic is a linear-time temporal logic designed for classifying the time-dependent signals originating from continuous-state or hybrid-state dynamical systems according to formal specifications. It has been conceived as a tool for systematizing the monitoring of cyber-physical systems, supporting the automatic translation of complex safety specifications into monitoring algorithms, faithfully representing their semantics. Almost all algorithms hitherto suggested do, however, assume perfect identity between the sensor readings, informing the monitor about the system state and the actual ground truth. Only recently have Visconti et al. addressed the issue of inexact measurements, taking up the simple model of interval-bounded per-sample error that is unrelated, in the sense of chosen afresh, across samples. We expand their analysis by decomposing the error into an unknown yet fixed offset and an independent per-sample error and show that in this setting, monitoring of temporal properties no longer coincides with collecting Boolean combinations of state predicates evaluated in each time instant over best-possible per-sample state estimates, but can be genuinely more informative in that it infers determinate truth values for monitoring conditions that interval-based evaluation remains inconclusive about. For the model-free as well as for the linear model-based case, we provide optimal evaluation algorithms based on affine arithmetic and SAT modulo theory, solving over linear arithmetic. The resulting algorithms provide conclusive monitoring verdicts in many cases where state estimations inherently remain inconclusive. In their model-based variants, they can simultaneously address the issues of uncertain sensing and partial observation.

On testimonial knowledge and its functions

The problem of explaining how we acquire knowledge via testimony gives rise to a dilemma, according to which any theory must make testimonial knowledge either too hard or too easy, and therefore no adequate account of testimonial knowledge is possible. In recent work (2020), John Greco offers a solution to the dilemma on behalf of anti-reductionism that appeals to Edward Craig’s functionalist epistemology. It is argued that Greco’s solution is flawed, in that his functionalist account provides wrong verdicts of ordinary cases of testimonial knowledge. In contrast, it is shown that both anti-reductionism and reductionism have the resources to solve the dilemma and provide the right verdicts in ordinary cases of testimonial knowledge without appealing to Greco’s functionalism.

ANALYSIS RELATED TO JUDGES’ CONSIDERATIONS IN THE IMMEDIATE DECISION OF CRIMINAL ACTIONS AGAINST CHILDREN


 Analysis of Judges' Considerations in Imposing Decisions on Immoral Crimes Against Children and implementation of decisions related to Law Number 23 of 2002 concerning Child Protection Article 81 Paragraph (2). The purpose of this paper is to analyze the judge's considerations in deciding cases of immoral crimes against children. This research method uses an empirical juridical approach which is carried out by interviewing several respondents or related sources. The results of the study show that when judges are deciding on criminal cases involving children, they take into account both items that charge and things that relieve the issue. However, the implementation of the verdicts in criminal cases involving children is carried out in line with the Operational Standards of General Criminal Procedure, as well as with the Children's Criminal Justice System. There are three different types of decisions that can be made under the provisions of the KUHAP, namely: court decisions in the form of a judgment (Veroordeling), court decisions in the form of a redeeving of all charges (Vrijspraak), and court decisions in the form of freedom from all forms of law (Onslag van all rechtsvervolging).
 
 
 
 
 
 

What’s So Special About General Verdicts? Questioning the Preferred Verdict Format in American Criminal Jury Trials

Abstract Criminal juries in the United States typically deliver their decisions through a “general verdict,” expressing only their ultimate conclusion of “guilty” or “not guilty,” rather than through a “special verdict” that identifies whether each element of the charged crime has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. American courts have broadly favored the use of general verdicts in criminal cases due to concerns that the special verdict will curtail the jury’s decision-making autonomy, including its power to nullify the law in favor of the defense, potentially undermining the criminal defendant’s constitutional right to trial by jury. This Article confronts the legal status quo on verdict format and its underlying, untested assumptions. Drawing upon prior psychology findings and legal professionals’ anecdotal observations, it questions whether the general verdict poses its own under-acknowledged threats to the rights of criminal defendants and the decision-making agency of jurors. While the more guided special verdict format is presumed to threaten nullifying acquittals, the unguided general verdict format might be enabling convictions that violate constitutional norms of due process, impartial adjudication, and equal protection. Given the high-stakes values potentially implicated in the choice of verdict format in criminal cases, it is time to put the conventional wisdom in favor of general verdicts to an empirical test. This Article therefore proposes a methodological framework for investigating whether the legal status quo accurately reflects (1) current stakeholders’ preferences and predictions, and (2) experimentally testable legal and cognitive effects of general versus special verdicts in lay determinations of criminal liability. A data-informed understanding is needed to assess whether the general verdict is optimizing the integrity, fairness, and constitutionality of criminal jury decision making.

The Press and Libel Before New York Times v. Sullivan

The Press and Libel Before New York Times v. Sullivan

A Modern History of the Not Proven Verdict

While the origins of Scots law's unique “not proven” verdict in criminal cases are well-documented, there has been no systematic examination of its use and interpretation over time. Although the verdict has frequently been the subject of controversy in the courts, legal journals or public debate, analysis of it has tended to be sporadic and focused on specific controversies arising at given points in time. As a result, discussions about the verdict's future are often cyclical, meaning that the debate tends to repeat itself rather than advancing over time. This article fills this gap in the literature. Based on a comprehensive review of sources including (but not limited to) judicial statistics, court decisions, periodical literature and Parliamentary debates, it charts the evidence on the use of the not proven verdict by juries, the approach of the courts, and debates both on how the verdict should be interpreted and whether it should be retained.

Verstek Divorce Case in the Perspective of Positive Law and Islamic Law

The research problem is that, in examining the verstek of the divorce case, the judge asked the plaintiff to prove the argument of the lawsuit with written evidence and / or witnesses, even though the verstek provisions did not regulate that. What is the legal basis of evidence regarding the subject matter in verstek and why did the defendant choose not to attend the trial and how is the verzet examination of divorce cases in court. how to study literature. While the data analysis method used is descriptive normative, that is, the method used to describe the norms on which the judge accepts, examine and resolve cases that emphasize the aspect of the prevailing legislation. Based on the analysis, it can be seen that the reason the judge ordered proof is: In the case of the verstek case of divorce cases, the principle of Lex Specialis Derogat Lex Generali is applied, therefore divorce cases are an exception to the HIR provisions. Because proof can show more of a legal function in providing a sense of justice and protection to society. Proof is useful to know the truth of the plaintiff's claim whether the lawsuit has legal grounds and does not violate rights. The formulation of Article 125 paragraph (1) HIR does not contain the words 'must', but instead the word 'accepted' is used.Apart from basing it on positive legal provisions, in the version of divorce cases, the panel of judges also based on the doctrine in the Fiqh Books in the form of syar'iyah evidence. In a divorce case what is sought is material truth, not mere formal truth. It can be seen from the verdicts in divorce cases both recognized and in the verstek verdict, still undergoing a proving process. Both positive law and Islamic law see the need for proof in a verdict from a divorce case.Keywords : Verstek; Divorce Case; Positive Law; Islamic law.

Wildlife Crime: A Crime of Hegemonic Masculinity?

Scholarship within green criminology focusing on crimes and harms against nonhuman animals has been increasing. Little attention, however, has been directed at the gendered aspects of these crimes. For example, why is it that the great majority of offenders involved in wildlife trade and the illegal killing of endangered predators are male? The aim of this article is to fill the gap in the literature, relying on confiscation reports from Norwegian Customs of nonhuman animals—most of whom are listed in CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora)—as well as an analysis of verdicts in cases in Norwegian courts of “theriocides” (animal murders) of large predators. This article will assess the number of men and women involved in these crimes and harms, and will present some trends of theriociders. This article will employ ecofeminist and masculinities theories to better understand the gendered dynamics involved in wildlife trafficking and the theriocides of large carnivores.

Explicating Logical Independence

Accounts of (complete) logical independence which coincide when applied in the case of classical logic diverge elsewhere, raising the question of what a satisfactory all-purpose account of logical independence might look like. ‘All-purpose’ here means: working satisfactorily as applied across different logics, taken as consequence relations. Principal candidate characterizations of independence relative to a consequence relation are (i) that there the consequence relation concerned is determined by (= sound and complete w.r.t.) only by classes of (bivalent) valuations providing for all possible truth-value combinations for the formulas whose independence is at issue, and (ii) that the consequence relation ‘says’ nothing special about how those formulas are related that it does not say about arbitrary formulas. (The latter approach, we associate with de Jongh, though it is closely related to Marczewski’s notion of general algebraic independence, as well as to the absence of non-trivial logical relations as conceived by Lemmon.) Each of these proposals returns counterintuitive verdicts in certain cases—the truth-value inspired approach classifying certain cases one would like to describe as involving failures of independence as being cases of independence, and the de Jongh approach counting some intuitively independent pairs of formulas as not being independent after all. In final section, a modification of the latter approach is tentatively sketched to correct for these misclassifications. The attention is on conceptual clarification throughout, rather than the provision of technical results. Proofs, as well as further elaborations, are lodged in the ‘longer notes’ in a final Appendix.