刑事审判有什么特别之处?

R. Duff
{"title":"刑事审判有什么特别之处?","authors":"R. Duff","doi":"10.33115/udg_bib/qf.i5.22823","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper offers some further support to Sarah Summers’ argument, in «The Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial: Truth, Proof, and Rights», that we cannot separate process from outcome in the criminal trial—that the justification and legitimacy of the verdict (especially of a conviction) depends crucially on the procedure through which it was reached. Intuitive support for this view is found by considering the case of a guilty person who is convicted after a trial that denied him the opportunity or means for «effective participation»; further support is found in the provisions made for those who are «unfit to plead», those who lack the capacities necessary for effective participation in their trial. A firmer grounding for this view is then found in a theory of the criminal trial as a process through which alleged public wrongdoers are called to account—a process in which they should be active participants.","PeriodicalId":252725,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio facti. Revista internacional sobre razonamiento probatorio","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What’s so Special about the Criminal Trial?\",\"authors\":\"R. Duff\",\"doi\":\"10.33115/udg_bib/qf.i5.22823\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper offers some further support to Sarah Summers’ argument, in «The Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial: Truth, Proof, and Rights», that we cannot separate process from outcome in the criminal trial—that the justification and legitimacy of the verdict (especially of a conviction) depends crucially on the procedure through which it was reached. Intuitive support for this view is found by considering the case of a guilty person who is convicted after a trial that denied him the opportunity or means for «effective participation»; further support is found in the provisions made for those who are «unfit to plead», those who lack the capacities necessary for effective participation in their trial. A firmer grounding for this view is then found in a theory of the criminal trial as a process through which alleged public wrongdoers are called to account—a process in which they should be active participants.\",\"PeriodicalId\":252725,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quaestio facti. Revista internacional sobre razonamiento probatorio\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quaestio facti. Revista internacional sobre razonamiento probatorio\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33115/udg_bib/qf.i5.22823\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quaestio facti. Revista internacional sobre razonamiento probatorio","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33115/udg_bib/qf.i5.22823","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

本文进一步支持了萨拉·萨默斯在《刑事审判的认识论野心:真理、证据和权利》中的观点,即我们不能将刑事审判的过程与结果分开——判决(尤其是定罪)的正当性和合法性关键取决于达成判决的程序。考虑到一个有罪的人在审判后被判有罪,而审判剥夺了他“有效参与”的机会或手段,可以直观地支持这一观点;为那些“不适合辩护”的人、那些缺乏有效参与审判所需能力的人所作的规定提供了进一步的支持。这一观点的更坚实的基础是在刑事审判理论中发现,刑事审判是一个被指控的公共违法者被要求承担责任的过程——一个他们应该积极参与的过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What’s so Special about the Criminal Trial?
This paper offers some further support to Sarah Summers’ argument, in «The Epistemic Ambitions of the Criminal Trial: Truth, Proof, and Rights», that we cannot separate process from outcome in the criminal trial—that the justification and legitimacy of the verdict (especially of a conviction) depends crucially on the procedure through which it was reached. Intuitive support for this view is found by considering the case of a guilty person who is convicted after a trial that denied him the opportunity or means for «effective participation»; further support is found in the provisions made for those who are «unfit to plead», those who lack the capacities necessary for effective participation in their trial. A firmer grounding for this view is then found in a theory of the criminal trial as a process through which alleged public wrongdoers are called to account—a process in which they should be active participants.
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