The International Journal of Evidence & Proof最新文献

筛选

英文中文

‘It's the judicial equivalent of robbing Peter to pay Paul’—The implementation gap in section 28 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 这在司法上等同于'劫富济贫'--1999 年《青少年司法和刑事证据法》第 28 条的执行漏洞

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2024-06-13 DOI: 10.1177/13657127241259800

VE Munro, S. Weare, L. O’Doherty, G. Carter, L. Hudspith, E. Sleath, S. Brown, M. Cutland, C. Perot

{"title":"‘It's the judicial equivalent of robbing Peter to pay Paul’—The implementation gap in section 28 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999","authors":"VE Munro, S. Weare, L. O’Doherty, G. Carter, L. Hudspith, E. Sleath, S. Brown, M. Cutland, C. Perot","doi":"10.1177/13657127241259800","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127241259800","url":null,"abstract":"Section 28, the last of the special measures under the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 to be implemented, was rolled out across England and Wales between 2020 and 2022. This allows vulnerable and/or intimidated witnesses and complainants, who have first pre-recorded their evidence-in-chief through a police video-recorded interview, to pre-record their cross-examination, which is then presented to the court during the substantive trial. This article critically explores s. 28 by drawing upon qualitative data from 108 semi-structured interviews conducted with participants across seven stakeholder groups, including criminal justice practitioners, and complainants and their families in sexual offences cases. Through a critical consideration of the articulated benefits associated with s. 28 within the context of sexual offences cases, we argue that there continue to be substantial challenges associated with its implementation that reduce its prospects for success, and which need to be addressed as a priority.","PeriodicalId":506826,"journal":{"name":"The International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"22 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141347262","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}

引用次数: 0

Proof of cryptoasset ownership in England and Wales 英格兰和威尔士的加密资产所有权证明

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2024-06-10 DOI: 10.1177/13657127241259803

Jiabin Lai

引用次数: 0

Evidentiary value and evidentiary status of blockchain evidence 区块链证据的证据价值和证据地位

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2024-03-20 DOI: 10.1177/13657127241238020

Zelin Su

{"title":"Evidentiary value and evidentiary status of blockchain evidence","authors":"Zelin Su","doi":"10.1177/13657127241238020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127241238020","url":null,"abstract":"Blockchain evidence is a technical method for evidence storage, transmission and fixation. Its evidential value has a dual nature, reflected in the fact that it cannot be absolutely tamper-resistant, can only provide periodic assurance of evidence authenticity and the commonly used consortium chains do not possess all the benefits of public chains. Simultaneously, blockchain evidence occupies a unique status within the entire evidence system, it serves as an evidentiary storage mechanism, is essentially an electronic evidence reflecting both the evidence collection process and outcome and its notarisation and forensic examination documents are a type of opinion evidence. It is evident that blockchain evidence does not emerge in a vacuum, rather than serving as a mere replacement for traditional evidence, blockchain evidence represents an upgrade in the functionality and effectiveness of traditional evidence. From this perspective, the improvement of blockchain evidence rules should align with the basic position of ‘technological neutrality’, which means that although technological evolution can lead to rapid changes, legislators are not always required to cater to these dynamic demands. It is essential to distinguish between on-chain and off-chain when addressing issues of authenticity, hearsay and originality, and improvements proposing should within the frameworks of existing electronic evidence rules and opinion evidence rules, thereby unlocking the potential of blockchain evidence.","PeriodicalId":506826,"journal":{"name":"The International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"6 24","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140225665","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}

引用次数: 0

The International Journal of Evidence &amp; Proof最新文献

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof最新文献