Oxford Scholarship Online

You are looking at 1-10 of 11 items for: fulltext : science social point value major theories effect human lawhum lawclc

The Question of Deterrence Roger Hood and Carolyn Hoyle

in The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective Published in print: 2008 Published Online: Publisher: Oxford University Press March 2012 DOI: 10.1093/ ISBN: 9780199228478 eISBN: 9780191696329 acprof:oso/9780199228478.003.0010 Item type: chapter

This chapter examines the concept of general deterrence and analyses the research evidence on the subject, including recent econometric studies that have claimed to find a substantial deterrent effect of executions. The reviewed evidence recommends that it is not prudent to accept the hypothesis that capital punishment, as practised in the United States, deters murder to a marginally greater extent than does the threat and application of the supposedly lesser punishment of life imprisonment. The chapter argues that it is quite incorrect to conclude, when statistically significant negative coefficients have been found, that they constitute proof of deterrence.

Where Capital Punishment Remains Contested Roger Hood and Carolyn Hoyle

in The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective Published in print: 2008 Published Online: Publisher: Oxford University Press March 2012 DOI: 10.1093/ ISBN: 9780199228478 eISBN: 9780191696329 acprof:oso/9780199228478.003.0004 Item type: chapter

This chapter examines the countries that have not yet abolished the death penalty, although making progress, or those which question the moral or utilitarian case for executing criminals: Africa, the Middle East, the Anglophone Caribbean, and the United States of America. It assesses across the main regions of the world the current state of the debate on capital punishment and the prospects for abolition or a reduction in the use of the death penalty. In every one of these areas, the abolitionist cause continues to make progress, if not resulting in outright abolition Page 1 of 5 PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 23 January 2017

or a state of abolition de facto, at least in the reduction of executions. The countries that support the regular use of capital punishment are becoming more marginalised.

A Question of Opinion or a Question of Principle? Roger Hood and Carolyn Hoyle

in The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective Published in print: 2008 Published Online: Publisher: Oxford University Press March 2012 DOI: 10.1093/ ISBN: 9780199228478 eISBN: 9780191696329 acprof:oso/9780199228478.003.0011 Item type: chapter

This chapter examines the role of opinion, particularly public opinion, in relation to the politics of capital punishment. It discusses the possible impact that organisations of so-called ‘survivors’, the relatives of the victims of murder, may have on the politics of capital punishment. It reviews findings from research which has attempted to measure attitudes of the public towards capital punishment, including various subsections of the public who may have distinctive views on the subject. One of the main justifications for the death penalty is that the families of victims may consider that it is the only just response to heinous crimes and that they cannot move on from grieving without the execution of the perpetrator. The chapter concludes with a consideration of the extent to which legislatures and constitutional courts should be influenced by public opinion in its various forms.

Filling the Void: Democratic Deliberation and the Legitimization of Extra-Legal Action Clement Fatovic

in Extra-Legal Power and Legitimacy: Perspectives on Prerogative Published in print: 2013 Published Online: Publisher: Oxford University Press January 2014 DOI: 10.1093/ ISBN: 9780199965533 eISBN: 9780199351343 acprof:oso/9780199965533.003.0008 Item type: chapter

This chapter argues that deliberation can and should be used to assess the expediency and the legitimacy of all emergency measures, legal or extra-legal. Deliberation provides the only way to legitimize the use of extra-legal measures consistent with the principles and values that are used to legitimize the law itself, without requiring any prior commitment to a narrow set of constitutional or political ideas. A deliberative model of emergency can accommodate the views of Locke or Lincoln, Hamilton or Jefferson, because it does not require a prior commitment to ideas that Page 2 of 5 PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 23 January 2017

are particular to them or anyone else. A deliberative model of emergency would not necessarily identify in advance what justifies or restricts the use of emergency measures, but it could explain how and why their use could be justified or restricted.

Deciding Who Should Die: Problems of Inequity, Arbitrariness, and Racial Discrimination Roger Hood and Carolyn Hoyle

in The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective Published in print: 2008 Published Online: Publisher: Oxford University Press March 2012 DOI: 10.1093/ ISBN: 9780199228478 eISBN: 9780191696329 acprof:oso/9780199228478.003.0009 Item type: chapter

This chapter starts with a review of the extent to which the death penalty in retentionist countries is the mandatory punishment for murder or other serious crimes. It shows that the mandatory use of capital punishment has come under increasing attack as an unacceptably inflexible penalty. It then proceeds to a consideration of whether a discretionary use of capital punishment can be applied in an equitable and non-discriminatory manner. Legal scholarship and social science research on the American statutes that have sought to restrict the imposition of the death penalty are examined to see whether they have been successful in eliminating arbitrariness and discrimination in the infliction of the death penalty.

Introduction: The State and Coercive Preventive Measures Andrew Ashworth and Lucia Zedner in Preventive Justice Published in print: 2014 Published Online: May Publisher: Oxford University Press 2014 DOI: 10.1093/ ISBN: 9780198712527 eISBN: 9780191780820 acprof:oso/9780198712527.003.0001 Item type: chapter

This introductory chapter surveys the terrain of the book by examining the range of coercive preventive measures taken by the state, with a particular focus on those involving the deprivation of liberty. These include criminal offences, and powers taken in spheres as far apart as public health law, immigration law, and counterterrorism law. The chapter discusses the role of the state in preventing harm, from the historic conception of the ‘Night-watchman State’ to the rise of the ‘Preventive State’. It explores key concepts such as ‘prevention’, ‘justice’, and ‘coercion’, and it considers the distinction between punitive Page 3 of 5 PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 23 January 2017

measures and coercive preventive measures. It concludes by considering the rationales and justifications for resort to punitive measures and to preventive measures, and the procedural safeguards that should apply to them.

Introduction Liora Lazarus

in Contrasting Prisoners' Rights: A Comparative Examination of England and Germany Published in print: 2004 Published Online: Publisher: Oxford University Press March 2012 DOI: 10.1093/ ISBN: 9780199259830 eISBN: 9780191698644 acprof:oso/9780199259830.003.0001 Item type: chapter

This introductory chapter begins with a brief comparison of prisoners' rights in England and Germany. It then discusses some of the methodological problems facing comparative law, and the methodology and structure of this book.

The General Right to a Fair Trial Stefan Trechsel

in Human Rights in Criminal Proceedings Published in print: 2006 Published Online: Publisher: Oxford University Press January 2010 DOI: 10.1093/ ISBN: 9780199271207 eISBN: 9780191709623 acprof:oso/9780199271207.003.0004 Item type: chapter

In its standard formula for the definition of the right to a fair trial, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) mentions two aspects: the principle of equality of arms and the right to adversarial proceedings. The European Court of Human Rights concluded that the Contracting States have greater latitude when dealing with cases concerning civil rights and obligations than they have when dealing with criminal cases. An examination of the case-law reveals that the notion of fair trial is interpreted as also including other elements, in particular the right to a reasoned decision. This chapter discusses the scope of the right to a fair trial, the right to adversarial proceedings, the principle of equality of arms, the duty to disclose evidence, the importance of the presence of the prosecution at the hearing, the right to a reasoned judgment, and other aspects of fairness.

Page 4 of 5 PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 23 January 2017

The Court Rushing to Limit Application of the Exclusionary Rule “somewhere, anywhere&” Tracey Maclin

in The Supreme Court and the Fourth Amendment's Exclusionary Rule Published in print: 2012 Published Online: May Publisher: Oxford University Press 2013 DOI: 10.1093/ ISBN: 9780199795475 eISBN: 9780199979684 acprof:oso/9780199795475.003.0013 Item type: chapter

This chapter focuses on efforts to restrict the scope and application of the exclusionary rule. While Chief Justice Burger did not convince his colleagues to repeal the exclusionary rule in Stone v. Powell, that setback did not stop him from aggressively pushing his colleagues to impose additional restrictions on the rule—if not complete abolishment. Brewer v. Williams gave Burger another opportunity to push his agenda to abolish the rule, albeit in a context not involving the Fourth Amendment. But as occurred in Stone v. Powell, where Justice Powell would not go as far as Burger wished in repealing or even substantially modifying the exclusionary rule, Powell again thwarted Burger from achieving a major victory in his fight against the rule.

People on the Move: From the Countryside to the Factory/Prison Dario Melossi

in The Borders of Punishment: Migration, Citizenship, and Social Exclusion Published in print: 2013 Published Online: Publisher: Oxford University Press September 2013 DOI: 10.1093/ ISBN: 9780199669394 eISBN: 9780191748752 acprof:oso/9780199669394.003.0016 Item type: chapter

This chapter examines the factors that have shaped contemporary practices of migration control. It traces the long historic trajectory of relationships between capitalism, migratory movements, and processes of criminalization. It highlights the centrality of migratory movements for the historic formations of the working class, and thus the relevance of Marxist theory for the understanding of historic and contemporary processes of migration control. Finally, by outlining the changing relationships of migration and penality, the chapter aims to challenge the lack of consideration given to such relationships in much of the theoretical and analytical writing within criminology.

Page 5 of 5 PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 23 January 2017