作为政府意味着(几乎)永远不必说对不起:山姆·谢泼德案和错误监禁的意义

Jonathan L. Entin
{"title":"作为政府意味着(几乎)永远不必说对不起:山姆·谢泼德案和错误监禁的意义","authors":"Jonathan L. Entin","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.573080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dr. Sam Sheppard was at the center of the highest profile crime in Ohio history. As the Ohio Supreme Court put it, the case contained \"[m]urder and mystery, society, sex and suspense.\" Sheppard's conviction was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in a landmark 1966 ruling, but the controversy over the case continues to the present. The final legal chapter in the story may have been written with an unsuccessful wrongful-imprisonment lawsuit brought by the Sheppard estate in April 2000. This paper uses the long debate over the Sheppard case as a vehicle for exploring the concept of wrongful imprisonment. The main focus is on the Ohio wrongful-imprisonment statute, which has been described as among the most beneficent in the United States but which in operation has proven to be quite restrictive. The paper concludes by offering an alternative perspective on the idea of wrongful imprisonment, suggesting that the state has a moral if not a legal obligation toward those persons who have been erroneously convicted.","PeriodicalId":80399,"journal":{"name":"Akron law review","volume":"44 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Being the Government Means (Almost) Never Having to Say You’re Sorry: The Sam Sheppard Case and the Meaning of Wrongful Imprisonment\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan L. Entin\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.573080\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Dr. Sam Sheppard was at the center of the highest profile crime in Ohio history. As the Ohio Supreme Court put it, the case contained \\\"[m]urder and mystery, society, sex and suspense.\\\" Sheppard's conviction was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in a landmark 1966 ruling, but the controversy over the case continues to the present. The final legal chapter in the story may have been written with an unsuccessful wrongful-imprisonment lawsuit brought by the Sheppard estate in April 2000. This paper uses the long debate over the Sheppard case as a vehicle for exploring the concept of wrongful imprisonment. The main focus is on the Ohio wrongful-imprisonment statute, which has been described as among the most beneficent in the United States but which in operation has proven to be quite restrictive. The paper concludes by offering an alternative perspective on the idea of wrongful imprisonment, suggesting that the state has a moral if not a legal obligation toward those persons who have been erroneously convicted.\",\"PeriodicalId\":80399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Akron law review\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Akron law review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.573080\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Akron law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.573080","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

山姆·谢泼德医生是俄亥俄州历史上最引人注目的案件的中心人物。正如俄亥俄州最高法院所言,此案包含了“秘密与神秘、社会、性与悬念”。1966年,美国最高法院在一项具有里程碑意义的裁决中推翻了对谢泼德的定罪,但有关此案的争议一直持续到现在。2000年4月,谢泼德家族提起了一场不成功的非法监禁诉讼,这可能是故事的最后一章。本文以谢泼德案的长期争论为载体,探讨非法监禁的概念。主要焦点是俄亥俄州的非法监禁法规,该法规被描述为美国最仁慈的法规之一,但在操作中已被证明是相当严格的。论文最后提出了另一种关于错误监禁的观点,认为国家对那些被错误定罪的人即使没有法律义务,也有道德义务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Being the Government Means (Almost) Never Having to Say You’re Sorry: The Sam Sheppard Case and the Meaning of Wrongful Imprisonment
Dr. Sam Sheppard was at the center of the highest profile crime in Ohio history. As the Ohio Supreme Court put it, the case contained "[m]urder and mystery, society, sex and suspense." Sheppard's conviction was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in a landmark 1966 ruling, but the controversy over the case continues to the present. The final legal chapter in the story may have been written with an unsuccessful wrongful-imprisonment lawsuit brought by the Sheppard estate in April 2000. This paper uses the long debate over the Sheppard case as a vehicle for exploring the concept of wrongful imprisonment. The main focus is on the Ohio wrongful-imprisonment statute, which has been described as among the most beneficent in the United States but which in operation has proven to be quite restrictive. The paper concludes by offering an alternative perspective on the idea of wrongful imprisonment, suggesting that the state has a moral if not a legal obligation toward those persons who have been erroneously convicted.
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