Search

The article discusses the plea bargaining procedures in Vermont. Topics mentioned include the history of plea bargaining in the U.S., the disadvantages of plea bargaining, a discussion of how plea bargaining would benefit prosecutors, the tactics that prosecutors can utilize to manipulate charges, and the proposed amendment of rule of criminal in the state.

The article presents the discussion on normalization of sexual harassment. Topics include exploring 43 new accusations of sexual harassment, abuse, and assault against former US President Trump; and other international research on sexual and gendered harassment in higher education containing nature of law and employment regulations of institutions.

Copyright of FinanzRundschau is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article presents the discussion on related senses of common good. Topics include pursuing as the end of sets of activities of saving, borrowing, buying, and paying off a mortgage; strengthening and renewing the civic virtues of citizens and fostering the shared meanings and values; and assuming the reasonableness and autonomy of the citizens without addressing questions of character formation, fearing the accusations of perfectionism, or paternalism.

The article presents the discussion on criminal prosecutions including jurisdiction refering to a variety of limitations on a court's authority for trying a particular action or charge prosecuting the defendant.

The article presents the discussion on judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court on assisted suicide. Topics include Antonia Reitter's study directing the accusation against important reference areas of biomedical law; and behaviors being paternalistic in terms of protection or the well-being providing ethical assurance understanding human dignity.

In 1949 the novelist Louis-Ferdinand Céline was languishing in exile in Denmark, having fled a warrant that had been issued for his arrest on charges of collaboration during the Occupation. Having been one of the most successful writers of the 1930s, Céline was now one of the most hated men in France; a notorious anti-semite. During this period the lettristes Maurice Lemaître and Isidore Isou, both Jews, decided launch a campaign to defend Céline. This was meantas a severe provocation to the right-thinking intelligentsia on the Left Bank who were so hypocritical and so quick to condemn Céline, whilst many of their crimes went unpunished. But what really brought Céline and the young Jews together was that they both shared a special contempt for Jean-Paul Sartre. More precisely all three of them them had been particularly incensed for parallel reasons, by an article Sartre had published in 1945 in the journal Les Temps Modernes called 'Portrait of an anti-Semite'. This article will explore why this piece had so incensed the three men, and what their contribution was to the politics of post-war Paris. More to the point the polemic against Sartre marks a shift from Humanism in French politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Free speech scholars have charged the Roberts Court with "First Amendment Lochnerism": At the urging of powerful interests, the Court is following an antiregulatory agenda and forgetting the lessons of the now-discredited Lochner v. New York decision, by using the Constitution's protection of speech to strike down a host of socioeconomic regulations. Opposing justices have joined the charge, accusing their colleagues of "reawakening Lochner's pre-New Deal threat of substituting judicial for democratic decision-making" in domains long thought to be free from constitutional scrutiny. Comparing modern free speech doctrine to Lochner, however, is problematic. It ignores the motivating concerns of Justice Holmes's Lochner dissent, which were procedural rather than ideological. It elides the Speech Clause's failure to categorize among kinds of speech, ignores that the line between commercial and noncommercial speech is too difficult to define for that distinction to serve as a level-of-scrutiny-setting rule, and denies that First Amendment theory cannot definitively justify lesser protection of commercial speech. This Article is the first to chart a middle path between an anti-Lochnerist First Amendment and a libertarian one. It proposes an approach it calls faint-hearted First Amendment Lochnerism--suspicion of any speech regulation, regardless of the identity of the speaker or of the nature of the expression--while still affirming the government's ability to regulate economic activity and harmful speech. In analyzing the constitutionality of information-forcing government regulation, faint-hearted First Amendment Lochnerism looks to common-law, private law, and rights-based limitations in tort and contract law to decide whether such regulations should be permissible. The Article then applies this methodology to the Court's NIFLA v. Becerra decision, which drew charges of Lochnerism from its detractors, and shows how a foregrounding of relevant private law in First Amendment cases can preserve both (1) the preference for private ordering that is part of the Constitution's design and (2) the government's power to intervene in the traditional social and economic regulatory domains that those leveling the Lochnerism charge fear are most at risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the evolution of federal sentence transparency as a baseline for comparison, including the sound policy behind explaining a sentence. It mentions statutory, regulatory, case law, and ethical background for sentence transparency, or the lack thereof, in courts-martial. It also mentions military judges can legally and appropriately explain their sentences while preserving judicial discretion and minimizing the risk of error.

Public accusations of corruption leveled against public figures and institutions in Jordan have recently become a prominent feature of public discourse in the country. Informed by positioning theory as an analytical framework, this study focuses on public responses to such accusations through a discourse analysis of two major apologetic statements, or apologiae, issued in Jordan in 2018 and 2019: one by a controversial former royal court chief and minister of planning in response to public accusations of corruption and appropriation of public funds, and the other by the Office of Queen Rania of Jordan in response to accusations of wardrobe extravagance and overspending. The analysis shows that these two apologiae employed discourses that not only positioned the accused as blameless, but also as victims of defamation. Reference to one's history, such as public service to the nation and one's accomplishments, was exploited. In contrast, the accusers were explicitly or implicitly positioned as unjust, biased, vindictive, or motivated by hidden agenda. A variety of discursive strategies were deployed, particularly invoking cultural moral orders, resorting to banal nationalism, expressing pride in one's public service and allegiance to the monarchy, and invoking a constellation of religious, professional and national identities. In the case of the royal apologia, it was implicitly positioned in western discourses, such as invoking feminine 'corporeal modernity', to respond to the wardrobe overspending accusations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

1979 standen zum ersten Mal in der Geschichte der Bundesrepublik Neonazis vor Gericht, denen terroristische Aktivitäten vorgeworfen wurden. Sie hatten in Norddeutschland eine Untergrundgruppe, die Kühnen-Schulte-Wegener-Gruppe, gebildet. Über diesen Fall ist, wie über den bundesdeutschen Rechtsterrorismus vor 1990 generell, bislang nur wenig bekannt. Barbara Manthe beleuchtet den Entstehungskontext und die Taten der Gruppe, die Raub- und Banküberfälle beging und politische Attentate plante. Zudem analysiert sie den Gerichtsprozess gegen die Täter in Bückeburg (Niedersachsen). Welchen Einfluss hatte der Sicherheitsdiskurs der 1970er Jahre auf die Verhandlung, die von den Verantwortlichen ausdrücklich Terroristenprozess präsentiert wurde? Waren die Angeklagten darin erfolgreich, mit Propaganda und Provokation vor Gericht ihre eigene terrorist show zu inszenieren? In 1979, Neo-Nazis faced trial for terrorist activities for the first time in the Federal Republic. They had formed an underground group, the Kühnen-Schulte-Wegener-Group, in North Germany. As is true for much of West German right-wing terrorism before 1990, little is known about this case. Barbara Manthe examines the context of the emergence and the deeds of the group, which conducted robberies and bank raids as well as planning political assassinations. She also analyses the trial against the perpetrators in Bückeburg (Lower Saxony). What influence did the security discourse of the 1970s exert on the conduct of the trial, which was explicitly presented as a terrorist trial by the authorities in charge? Were the accused successful in staging their own terrorist show using propaganda and provocation in court? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While religious groups have recurrently approached the state and its institutions to rationalize their acts and selves, government taking recourse to referee religious concerns has had a long history. The colonial state in India was replete with specimens of the intermix of seemingly incompatible elements of the religious and the secular, in this case, religion and the legal network, avowedly one of modern state's key secular institutions. In the qasbah town of Amroha where in 1895 a dispute occurred between Shia and Sunni Muslims about the wording of azan (call to prayer), both sides lined up with petitions and memoranda to win over a verdict on their side. The British authorities played it well, to their own advantages and whims. Similarly, over a communal strife between some Muslims and Parsis of Bombay in 1874, a series of letters to newspapers invoked the British sense of justice and fairness. While 'a lover of peace' sought strict actions against the perpetrators of violence, a certain 'superior race' pledged their loyalty and law-abiding nature. Several arrests were made as a follow up but charges could not be proved against a large number of the captives. Disputes and lawlessness thus became an arena for the government to play a role in determining what was right or wrong and who could have the final word where laws and rulings, not scriptures, determined the course of religious destinies and identities. This essay explores the intermediary nature and significant interventions of the state in handling the tumultuous relationship between religion and law, rendering them even more volatile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the use of language in two selected Nigerian libel cases: A. A. versus W. O. (1990) and C. O. & A. versus C. G. A. (2014).2 The study employs a pragmatic analysis to find out the indirect contextual meanings embedded in the defamatory texts in the selected libel cases. For its theoretical bases, the study leans towards Brown and Levinson's politeness theory, Austin's speech acts theory, and Grice's cooperative principle in conversation. It reveals that the defendants attacked the plaintiffs' positive face and their own (the defendants') negative face by not paying attention to politeness and cooperative principles in conversation when performing face-threatening acts. The face-threatening acts of the defendants which are classified as warnings, insults, accusations, and complaints express their negative assessment of the plaintiffs' positive face. Our study thus concludes by suggesting that politeness strategies such as bald on-record, and offrecord (indirect) as well as maxims of quality, quantity and relation should be considered when performing inevitable face-threatening acts to avoid liabilities in libel cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article highlights a process that trial counsel can employ when investigating and prosecuting entitlement fraud cases. Topics mentioned include a description of various fraud cases involving basic allowance for housing, family separation allowance, and permanent duty travel pay, the factors that need consider when charging and executing appropriate charges, and some guidelines for effective presentation of fraud cases.

The article presents the discussion on accused of through the measures taken during the reign having the Hungarian economy ruined. Topics include Nagy's more liberal economic course not leading to an increase in production; and Hungarian-Yugoslav relations accepting Federal Minister, the assurance of my complete devotion.

Motivated by the recent boom of the sharing economy, this paper presents a scheme of sharing demand-side energy resources (DERs) among multiple prosumers. Successful sharing must achieve enhanced utilization efficiency of DERs and, in the mean time, ensure voluntary participation of prosumers and a sharing-enabling aggregator. It is also desirable to incentivize the adoption of DERs. To fulfill these goals, we formulate a mathematical program with equilibrium constraints (MPEC) for DER valuation within a sharing community. The aggregator coordinates DER operations in real-time; then it solve this MPEC problem after each billing period. In doing so, the aggregator evaluates two operating costs for each prosumer: the actual cost under coordination and the counter-factual cost if the prosumer independently traded power with the aggregator. We define the difference in these two costs as the coordination surplus, which the aggregator and the prosumer split. Simulation results demonstrate that this sharing procedure effectively achieves the aforementioned goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on charges of false imprisonment facing defendants who were part of a group of protesters who surrounded the car of Joan Burton, the leader of the Labour Party in Ireland in November 2014. It discusses the reason behind the protest, the economic and political processes that have been at the core of the charges, and the building of the movement for nonpayment/boycott of water charges.

This article discusses the judicial responsibility afforded to the president of Peru by the country's constitution. The author comments on the differences between criminal judicial responsibility and constitutional responsibility, and examines several constitutional articles, including one regarding criminal accusations and one regarding moral incapacity.

The article features several statements of support to physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer, chief advisor of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission regarding his loyalty investigation. The friends and colleagues of Oppenheimer express their faith in his integrity and loyalty. Samuel K. Allison credits his good leadership and believes that this investigation would establish his reliability. Harold C. Urey contemplates on his contributions and asserts that this investigation is unjust. He adds that this investigation may bring negative implication to the youth. Edward Shills states that his suspension is an act of injustice.

The article analyses the disciplinary offences under the Armed Forces Act 2006 which were prosecuted in the court martial between 2010 and 2015 in Great Britain. Topics discussed include relationship between international and British military law; criminal defense practice as per the British military justice system; and ways in which court martial tends to concentrate on the international legal aspects of the military justice system.

The article recommends the revising the U.S. Manual for Courts-Martial to clarify the circumstances under which overpayment cases should be treated as criminal larceny versus mere civil debt collection actions. Topics discussed include the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the case "U.S. v. Dean," and "U.S. v. Helms;" strict liability for offenses with minor penalties such as traffic violations; and ways in which court-martial lacks the authority to order a service member to repay a debt.

In his work on truth telling, avowal and juridical processes, Foucault alerts us to legal 'apparatuses' that demand certain ways of speaking the truth and the sorts of subjects these recursively produce. This paper explores the role of truth telling in a specific context; namely, 'criminal' accusation as instanced by the agora-like processes that enabled Socrates' notorious accusation for impiety, his defence and the resultant death sentence. Through this analysis, I seek to highlight elements of truth telling required by accusatorial apparatuses that prefigured criminal justice. By examining selected texts detailing Socrates' trial, I will indicate several aspects of accusation and an exclusionary political logic to which it has long been attached. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article relates the story of Robert J. Graves, pastor of Bethlehem Presbyterian Church who was ordered to be arrested by General John H. Winder in 1862. Topics covered include the accusation against Graves for treason against the Confederacy, the difficulty in locating the biographical details of the life of Graves and the life story recounted by Graves to his friend William Brown during his imprisonment at Castle Thunder.

In the American criminal justice system, accusations have eternal life. Prosecutors, judges, and prison officials regularly consider dismissed charges and even prior acquittals in the defendant's criminal history when making decisions ranging from the filing of charges to the imposition of punishment. This Article argues that the criminal justice system's reliance on "accusation evidence" should be understood as furthering that system's larger allegiance to attaining and preserving findings of guilt. Once the government obtains a guilty plea or verdict, appellate courts rarely overturn convictions based on concerns about the accuracy of the conviction; indeed, post-conviction review procedures often are structured to prevent meaningful consideration of innocence claims. Appellate courts will eventually cease reconsideration of the conviction altogether, even, in many cases, where legitimate questions about the defendant's guilt remain. But while convictions are eventually laid to rest, accusations that do not result in convictions can be reconsidered forever, in a variety of contexts, by a variety of government actors, applying low or non-existent standards of proof. Once guilt is obtained, the system aims to preserve it; if guilt is eluded, the system will pursue it. This Article begins by reviewing the ways in which the criminal justice system seeks to obtain and maintain convictions. It then discusses the criminal justice system's reliance on accusation evidence, identifying how uncertainty about the defendant's culpability in the absence of a conviction drives decision makers to reconsider that outcome and replace it with their own determinations of guilt. It goes on to contrast the systemic reconsideration of convictions with the reconsideration of charges for which no conviction was obtained, using the doctrine of finality as a comparison point. Based on this analysis, it argues that the criminal justice system is structured to obtain and preserve findings of guilt, even if doing so does not advance the pursuit of truth or the conviction of the culpable. This Article then examines the implications of the systemic dedication to the pursuit and preservation of guilt, and suggests ways in which it might, and should, be dismantled. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores the criminal responsibility of an accused person under the Criminal Procedure Act (51 of 1977) in South Africa. Topics discussed include the conviction of an accused person, the legal rules on the use of automatism evidence, the classification of criminal incapacity due to mental illness as pathological incapacity, the defence of non-pathological incapacity due to provocation and emotion stress, and the causes of automatism.