Search

This essay interrogates Mies van der Rohe's Federal Center Courthouse vis-à-vis the events of the Trial of the Chicago Seven, which was held there beginning in 1969. In doing so, the essay reveals how Mies subverted the conventions of courtroom design and consequently disrupted the precise rituals and power relationships that comprise the performance of jurisprudence. Specifically, Mies removed "the bar" from the courtroom space, which typically divides spectators from trial participants, producing a Brechtian estrangement of the courtroom and of trial procedure that played out in the various forms of misconduct that marked the theatrical trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A reprint of the speech of New York trial lawyer Emile Z. Berman at The M Missouri Bar Annual Meeting published in April 1961 issue of the Journal of The Missouri Bar is presented. Topic discussed include trial in the field of field of negligence law; role of plaintiffs' attorney and defense attorney in the trials; and understanding the defendant's point of view in the trials.

This article examines "courtroom paintings" in Latin American art, focusing on the works of Martín Tovar y Tovar, Juan Lovera, and especially Pedro Subercaseaux. Drawing from the philosophical work of Alain Badiou, the article offers a comparative reading of the theme of "anticipation" in several of their paintings, suggesting that this theme may point to an underlying democratic element in art about independence. The article ends by discussing Subercaseaux's work in the context of the Argentine centenary celebration of independence, exploring the ways in which its use of "anticipation," counterintuitively, might have made it easier for the regime to co-opt in its attempt to rewrite the moment of independence in 1910. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, the author reflects on the integration of mass media and the Internet services in the courtroom and also discusses the challenges faced by trial courts and jurors after the evolution of mass media in legislation. According to the author, the integration of mass media in the trial courts may hamper the judicial trials and can also affect the duration of legal cases.

Given the substantial and growing scientific literature on implicit bias, the time has now come to confront a critical question: What, if anything, should we do about implicit bias in the courtroom? The author team comprises legal academics, scientists, researchers, and even a sitting federal judge who seek to answer this question in accordance with behavioral realism. The Article first provides a succinct scientific introduction to implicit bias, with some important theoretical clarifications that distinguish between explicit, implicit, and structural forms of bias. Next, the Article applies the science to two trajectories of bias relevant to the courtroom. One story follows a criminal defendant path; the other story follows a civil employment discrimination path. This application involves not only a focused scientific review but also a step-by-step examination of how criminal and civil trials proceed. Finally, the Article examines various concrete intervention strategies to counter implicit biases for key players in the justice system, such as the judge and jury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the analysis of trials through interdisciplinary approaches. It discusses the analysis of U.S. trials on a philosophical perspective and as a set of practices and social institution. It examines trials in the context of rhetoric by citing the 1923 Cook County trial in Chicago of Sabella Nitti. It highlights how to comprehend trials through systematic examinations of trial transcripts and relevant documents. It delineates trial analysis in the realm of linguistic anthropology by discussing the methods in the Hopi Appellate Court trial which include court observation, archival research, and audio recording transcription of courtroom interaction. An excerpt of the discussions regarding the translation of the different discourses in court is also provided.

The article presents an examination of the representation of a trial in the film "Judgment at Nuremberg," by Stanley Kramer to an actual trial. It reflected on the artistic strategy to illuminate central philosophical questions in the field of law and the representation of a juridical subject matter in the medium of film.

This article builds on investigations of practices of interpretation by linguistic anthropologists who, in their pursuit of Challenges to Speech Act Theory, have alluded to but not yet fully explored how members of the same speech community make use of multiple, complex, and sometimes competing meaning-making practices within the same speech event. The argument is made that contexts of debate and dispute are ideal sites for analyzing such practices as the multiple calculi of meaning insofar as discourses of argumentation offer explicit moments by and through which members of a single community proffer competing interpretations of troubling acts and events. To support this claim, insights gained from J.L. Austin's treatment of speech act infelicities and legal anthropology's `trouble-case' methodology are employed to inform an interaction-based analysis that explores how competing Hopi interpretive practices are constituted in courtroom discourses between parties to probate disputes before the Hopi Tribal Court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reports on the competence of juveniles to stand on a trial in the U.S. Shift of juvenile justice system from a rehabilitative focus to a model more resembling the adult criminal justice; Abilities that may be required for decisional competence; Factors to consider in evaluating juveniles for competence to stand on trials; Elements that will help assist the court in determining competence of juveniles to stand on a trial.

In recent years, there has been debate about the validity of figure drawings, although surveys of clinicians in both general and forensic practice still find them to be one of the most widely used tests of personality functioning. Using both Heilbrun's (1992) guidelines for the use of psychological tests in a forensic evaluation and the U.S. Supreme Court's Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993) criteria for the admission of scientific evidence, I examine the admissibility of human figure drawings in court. The results suggest that the most commonly used methods for interpreting human figure drawings fall short of meeting the standards for admissibility. The use of overall rating scales, although weak in validity, appear to minimally meet these standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the televising of court room trials. The Courtroom Television Network is the first serious commercial effort to televise selected trials nationally and to provide expert commentary on what happens in the U.S. courtrooms. Despite the surge in popularity of televised court proceedings, the bar has always, at best, been ambivalent about embracing cameras in the courtroom. The author is of the opinion that television makes trials more political and less judicial. There are three prejudicial effects of cameras in the courtroom. First, the trial, in reality, operates on a larger theme than the matter under charge, the judicial process is corrupted by a substitution of the solemn, calm, deliberate judgment of the finder of fact for the outrage of an inflamed public. Second, the adversarial system, designed for neutral and dispassionate judicial prosecution, transforms into an instrument of a politically motivated persecution. Third, the public outcry leads to a political vice of judicial disposition against a disfavored minority.

The article presents various court cases in the U.S. In the People v. Sidener case, the defendant was charged by information with the possession of heroin in violation of section 11500 of the California Health and Safety Code. It was also alleged that on February 7, `955, the defendant had been convicted of the same crime. He was found guilty of the substantive offense; the district attorney did not move the court to strike the allegation of the prior conviction, and that conviction was established in a separate proceeding. Generally, a California trial court enjoys several options in sentencing a convicted defendant: probation, a county jail term and subsequent probation, a jail term alone, or a state prison sentence if the governing statute permits.

The article focuses on the right to a public trial. There is disagreement as to when and why the right to a public trial was first developed. It is probably due to the great age of the right and to the fact that it has long been taken for granted. The courts and the commentators explain its necessity along two broad lines: as a defendant's right and as a right of the public. Those who call it the right of the defendant support their position in several ways. One of the first explanations given was that the presence of the public at the trial made it more difficult for a witness to lie. While a public trial may well be said to improve the quality of testimony by reducing, to some extent, the tendency of a witness to lie, it is also true that spectators in the courtroom may have an adverse effect on the testimony. Thus the public's presence has often forced witnesses into frightened or embarrassed silence. The many recognized exceptions to the right to a public trial conflict with the explanation of the right in terms of the unknown witness.

The article discusses that in1998, Marlene Dumas attended a talk on South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission presented by Justice Albie Sachs in The Hague. It mentions the architects suggested installing the textiles in the courtroom. It also mentions that artwork was taken down in 2018 for a year-long conservation process conducted in Cape Town.