International Journal of Evidence & Proof最新文献_第9页

Noticeboard 布告栏

IF 1.5 2区社会学

International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2019-10-01 DOI: 10.1177/1365712719874633

M. Plaxton

引用次数: 0

Legal advice privilege and artificial legal intelligence: Can robots give privileged legal advice? 法律咨询特权与人工法律智能：机器人能提供特权法律咨询吗？

IF 1.5 2区社会学

International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2019-10-01 DOI: 10.1177/1365712719862296

M. Stockdale, R. Mitchell

{"title":"Legal advice privilege and artificial legal intelligence: Can robots give privileged legal advice?","authors":"M. Stockdale, R. Mitchell","doi":"10.1177/1365712719862296","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1365712719862296","url":null,"abstract":"Legal professional privilege entitles parties to legal proceedings to object to disclosing communications. The form of legal professional privilege that is now commonly known as ‘legal advice privilege’ attaches to communications between a client and its lawyers in connection with the provision of legal advice. The provision of legal advice increasingly involves the use of technology across a wide spectrum of activities with varying degrees of human interaction or supervision. Use of technology ranges from a lawyer conducting a keyword search of a legal database to legal advice given online by fully automated systems. With technology becoming more integrated into legal practice, an important issue that has not been explored is whether legal advice privilege attaches to communications between client and legal services provider regardless of the degree of human involvement and even if the ‘lawyer’ might constitute a fully automated advice algorithm. In essence, our central research question is: If a robot gives legal advice, is that advice privileged? This article makes an original and distinctive contribution to discourse in this area through offering novel perspectives on and solutions to a question which has not previously been investigated by legal academics.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"23 1","pages":"422 - 439"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1365712719862296","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45457364","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}

引用次数: 8

Beliefs about suspect alibis: A survey of lay people in the United Kingdom, Israel, and Sweden 对嫌疑人不在场证明的信念：对英国、以色列和瑞典非专业人士的调查

IF 1.5 2区社会学

International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2019-09-26 DOI: 10.1177/1365712719873008

Shiri Portnoy, Lorraine Hope, A. Vrij, K. Ask, S. Landström

{"title":"Beliefs about suspect alibis: A survey of lay people in the United Kingdom, Israel, and Sweden","authors":"Shiri Portnoy, Lorraine Hope, A. Vrij, K. Ask, S. Landström","doi":"10.1177/1365712719873008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1365712719873008","url":null,"abstract":"During police interviews, innocent suspects may provide unconvincing alibis due to impaired memory processes or guilt-presumptive behaviour on behalf of the interviewer. Consequently, innocent suspects may be prosecuted and tried in court, where lay people who serve jury duty will assess their alibi’s credibility. To examine lay people’s beliefs and knowledge regarding suspect alibis, and specifically about such factors that may hamper innocent suspects’ ability to provide convincing alibis, we administered an eight-question questionnaire across the United Kingdom (n = 96), Israel (n = 124), and Sweden (n = 123). Participants did not tend to believe that innocent suspects’ alibis might inadvertently include incorrect details, but acknowledged that impaired memory processes may cause this. Additionally, most participants believed that a presumption of guilt can affect how interviewers interview suspects. The findings suggest that lay people who may serve jury duty hold some mistaken beliefs regarding alibi provision by suspects.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"24 1","pages":"59 - 74"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2019-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1365712719873008","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46931645","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}

引用次数: 1

Case commentaries 案例评论

IF 1.5 2区社会学

International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2019-09-05 DOI: 10.1177/1365712719874630

M. Plaxton

{"title":"Case commentaries","authors":"M. Plaxton","doi":"10.1177/1365712719874630","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1365712719874630","url":null,"abstract":"In the course of performing a laparoscopic hysterectomy on Lanette Mitchell, Dr Evan Shikora made an incision into Mitchell’s abdomen. He noticed that Mitchell’s colon “had been severely cut”, making it necessary to perform an emergency loop ileostomy. Mitchell’s bowel was repaired, but she needed to wear an external ileostomy pouch for a time. Mitchell sued Dr Shikora, alleging negligence. She argued that Dr Shikora’s conduct fell below the medical standard of care, inasmuch as he failed “to identify her colon before making an incision into her abdomen”. Importantly, though, she did not claim battery or lack of informed consent; i.e. she did not claim that she was unaware of the risks or complications associated with the medical procedure when she consented to it. At trial, the defendant adduced expert evidence about known risks and complications of laparoscopic hysterectomies; in particular, that “in making the initial incision, a physician often cannot see through the tissue”, making it impossible to know for certain whether he or she will perforate the colon even in the absence of surgical negligence. The risks of such perforation are therefore present even during a ”properly performed laparoscopic hysterectomy.” The jury found in favour of Dr Shikora. On appeal, a three-judge panel of the Pennsylvania Superior Court held that the expert evidence, adduced by the defendant, should have been excluded. That evidence, the Superior Court held, was irrelevant, misleading, and confusing:","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"23 1","pages":"440 - 441"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2019-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1365712719874630","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47880689","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}

引用次数: 0

Book Review: Obstacles to Fairness in Criminal Proceedings 书评:刑事诉讼公正的障碍

IF 1.5 2区社会学

International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2019-07-01 DOI: 10.1177/1365712718807355

S. Fairclough

引用次数: 0

Noticeboard 布告栏

IF 1.5 2区社会学

International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2019-07-01 DOI: 10.1177/1365712719853150

M. Plaxton

引用次数: 0

Case commentary 情况下评论

IF 1.5 2区社会学

International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2019-07-01 DOI: 10.1177/1365712719853154

M. Plaxton

引用次数: 1

Measuring justice 测量正义

IF 1.5 2区社会学

International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2019-06-11 DOI: 10.1177/1365712719851136

William Cullerne Bown

引用次数: 1

Communication and cross-examination in court for children and adults with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review 智力残疾儿童和成人在法庭上的沟通和盘问：系统综述

IF 1.5 2区社会学

International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2019-06-03 DOI: 10.1177/1365712719851134

J. Morrison, R. Forrester-Jones, J. Bradshaw, G. Murphy

{"title":"Communication and cross-examination in court for children and adults with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review","authors":"J. Morrison, R. Forrester-Jones, J. Bradshaw, G. Murphy","doi":"10.1177/1365712719851134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1365712719851134","url":null,"abstract":"Courts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland have identified children and adults with intellectual disabilities (ID) as vulnerable witnesses. The call from the English Court of Appeal is for advocates to adjust questioning during cross-examination according to individual needs. This review systematically examined previous empirical studies with the aim of delineating the particular communication needs of children and adults with ID during cross-examination. Studies utilising experimental methodology similar to examination/cross-examination processes, or which assessed the communication of actual cross-examinations in court were included. A range of communication challenges were highlighted, including: suggestibility to leading questions and negative feedback; acquiescence; accuracy; memory and understanding of court language. In addition, a number of influencing factors were identified, including: age; IQ level; question styles used. This review highlights the need for further research using cross-examination methodology and live practice, that take into consideration the impact on communication of the unique environment and situation of the cross-examination process.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"23 1","pages":"366 - 398"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1365712719851134","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42048171","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}

引用次数: 10

What about the non-legal facts: Revising Allen and Pardo’s analytical distinction between law and fact 非法律事实又如何？——对Allen和Pardo关于法律与事实的分析区分的再认识

IF 1.5 2区社会学

International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2019-06-02 DOI: 10.1177/1365712719851043

Ellika Sevelin

引用次数: 0