撒网

Michael D. Metelits
{"title":"撒网","authors":"Michael D. Metelits","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780199498611.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 2 examines the manner in which the Government of Bombay, convinced of Crawford’s guilt, sought testimonial and documentary evidence, mainly through Indian officials called ‘mamlatdars’. Those officials had to confess under oath that they had paid money for career favours. At law, this constituted bribery of a government official. Confessing this in court under oath was contrary to their best interests, but the presidency government found a way to secure their testimony. Nevertheless, the process of making an evidentiary case was fraught with problems.","PeriodicalId":209194,"journal":{"name":"The Arthur Crawford Scandal","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Spreading the Net\",\"authors\":\"Michael D. Metelits\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780199498611.003.0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Chapter 2 examines the manner in which the Government of Bombay, convinced of Crawford’s guilt, sought testimonial and documentary evidence, mainly through Indian officials called ‘mamlatdars’. Those officials had to confess under oath that they had paid money for career favours. At law, this constituted bribery of a government official. Confessing this in court under oath was contrary to their best interests, but the presidency government found a way to secure their testimony. Nevertheless, the process of making an evidentiary case was fraught with problems.\",\"PeriodicalId\":209194,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Arthur Crawford Scandal\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Arthur Crawford Scandal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199498611.003.0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Arthur Crawford Scandal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199498611.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

第二章考察了孟买政府在确信克劳福德有罪后,主要通过被称为“mamlatdars”的印度官员寻求证词和文件证据的方式。那些官员不得不宣誓承认,他们曾花钱获得职业上的好处。在法律上,这构成了对政府官员的贿赂。在法庭上宣誓承认这一点违背了他们的最大利益,但总统政府找到了一种方法来确保他们的证词。然而,提出证据的过程充满了问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Spreading the Net
Chapter 2 examines the manner in which the Government of Bombay, convinced of Crawford’s guilt, sought testimonial and documentary evidence, mainly through Indian officials called ‘mamlatdars’. Those officials had to confess under oath that they had paid money for career favours. At law, this constituted bribery of a government official. Confessing this in court under oath was contrary to their best interests, but the presidency government found a way to secure their testimony. Nevertheless, the process of making an evidentiary case was fraught with problems.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信