HemGrupperDiskuteraMerTidsandan
Sök igenom hela webbplatsen
Denna webbplats använder kakor för att fungera optimalt, analysera användarbeteende och för att visa reklam (om du inte är inloggad). Genom att använda LibraryThing intygar du att du har läst och förstått våra Regler och integritetspolicy. All användning av denna webbplats lyder under dessa regler.

Resultat från Google Book Search

Klicka på en bild för att gå till Google Book Search.

The Origins of Reasonable Doubt: Theological…
Laddar...

The Origins of Reasonable Doubt: Theological Roots of the Criminal Trial (Yale Law Library Series in Legal History and Reference) (utgåvan 2008)

av James Q. Whitman (Författare)

MedlemmarRecensionerPopularitetGenomsnittligt betygDiskussioner
341709,296 (4)Ingen/inga
To be convicted of a crime in the United States, a person must be proven guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt." But what is reasonable doubt? Even sophisticated legal experts find this fundamental doctrine difficult to explain. In this accessible book, James Q. Whitman digs deep into the history of the law and discovers that we have lost sight of the original purpose of "reasonable doubt." It was not originally a legal rule at all, he shows, but a theological one.   The rule as we understand it today is intended to protect the accused. But Whitman traces its history back through centuries of Christian theology and common-law history to reveal that the original concern was to protect the souls of jurors. In Christian tradition, a person who experienced doubt yet convicted an innocent defendant was guilty of a mortal sin. Jurors fearful for their own souls were reassured that they were safe, as long as their doubts were not "reasonable." Today, the old rule of reasonable doubt survives, but it has been turned to different purposes. The result is confusion for jurors, and a serious moral challenge for our system of justice.  … (mer)
Medlem:eapapp
Titel:The Origins of Reasonable Doubt: Theological Roots of the Criminal Trial (Yale Law Library Series in Legal History and Reference)
Författare:James Q. Whitman (Författare)
Info:Yale University Press (2008), Edition: First Edition, 288 pages
Samlingar:Ditt bibliotek
Betyg:
Taggar:Ingen/inga

Verksinformation

The Origins of Reasonable Doubt: Theological Roots of the Criminal Trial (Yale Law Library Series in Legal History and Reference) av James Q. Whitman

Ingen/inga
Laddar...

Gå med i LibraryThing för att få reda på om du skulle tycka om den här boken.

Det finns inga diskussioner på LibraryThing om den här boken.

You've gotta love books that not only regurgitate facts or that tell you what you already know, but that force you to look at things in a new way. Isn't that the magic of our collective madness (bibliomania)?
This is such a book. Prof. Whitman (Yale Law School) asks the question: "Why, in our system, must a criminal defendant be convicted 'beyond a reasonable doubt?'" Whitman points out that, although the phrase "reasonable doubt" is nowhere mentioned in the U.S. Constitution as a criminal defendant's right (in contrast, the rights to trial by jury and to confront one's accusers, among others, are specifically enumerated), courts (including the U.S. Supreme Court) have accorded the rule constitutional protection. Whitman also notes that many courts have specifically eschewed defining "reasonable doubt," resulting in confusion at the trial court level and among jurors struggling with complex questions of guilt and innocence.
One would think, nonetheless, that "reasonable doubt", as a criterion of guilt, exists to make convictions more difficult: The juror cannot convict unless convinced of defendant's "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." Not so, asserts Whitman. "Reasonable doubt" came into existence historically to make convictions EASIER!!
That this was so reflects the vast sociological and religious chasms existing between our postmodern 21st century society, and that of the 13th through 18th centuries when the rule took shape. Back in the day (WAY back in the day), what concerned judges, says Whitman, was the state of their immortal souls before God. To wrongly convict the accused, especially when so many convicted criminals were horribly mutilated or put to death, meant running afoul of the Biblical prohibition, "Judge not, lest ye be judged." The judge who wrongly convicted risked damnation of his soul (and the judges and jurors were uniformly male). The criterion of "reasonable doubt" meant that a judge or juror didn't have to be 100% convinced of the defendant's guilt (and there is always some doubt, albeit farfetched or fanciful)--as long as there was no "reasonable doubt," the judge could convict and sentence to mutilation or death without risking his soul in eternity. In other words, the criterion of "reasonable doubt" was for the comfort and consolation of the judge and juror, not the protection of the accused. One consulted one's conscience; if the doubt that existed was not "reasonable," then the judge could freely convict without fear.
This rule took shape in both the common law jurisdictions, those that follow the law of England or whose law originally derives from that of England; and in civil law jurisdictions (principally continental Europe), whose law originally derives from Roman law, the Justinian Corpus Juris, and the jus commune (Roman Catholic canon law as applied as a gap-filler in the domestic law of each jurisdiction or state).
Whitman asserts that the rule of "reasonable doubt" has been twisted from its original purpose; now, jurors must consider "reasonableness" as an objective measure, rather than in consulting their individual consciences. This so-called objectivity has spawned confusion, particularly since American and English trial court judges usually refuse to instruct befuddled juries as to what "doubts" are "reasonable." (Even where such instructions exist, they usually are not helpful, merely piling one description upon another without giving anything concrete. That, unfortunately, is a function of the imprecision of our languages.)
Whitman's book is useful. It's doubtful a rule so ingrained in our criminal procedure, one raised to constitutional status (at least here in America), will be abandoned or even significantly curtailed. Nonetheless, Whitman tells us why the rule exists, and why we find it so confusing. That is worthwhile in itself.
Highly recommended, particularly for legal history buffs, fans of medieval history, and criminal defense attorneys struggling to put flesh on "reasonable doubt." I learned a lot, and I've studied legal history for 30 years. ( )
  Pianojazz | Sep 5, 2008 |
inga recensioner | lägg till en recension
Du måste logga in för att ändra Allmänna fakta.
Mer hjälp finns på hjälpsidan för Allmänna fakta.
Vedertagen titel
Originaltitel
Alternativa titlar
Första utgivningsdatum
Personer/gestalter
Viktiga platser
Viktiga händelser
Relaterade filmer
Motto
Dedikation
Inledande ord
Citat
Avslutande ord
Särskiljningsnotis
Förlagets redaktörer
På omslaget citeras
Ursprungsspråk
Kanonisk DDC/MDS
Kanonisk LCC

Hänvisningar till detta verk hos externa resurser.

Wikipedia på engelska (1)

To be convicted of a crime in the United States, a person must be proven guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt." But what is reasonable doubt? Even sophisticated legal experts find this fundamental doctrine difficult to explain. In this accessible book, James Q. Whitman digs deep into the history of the law and discovers that we have lost sight of the original purpose of "reasonable doubt." It was not originally a legal rule at all, he shows, but a theological one.   The rule as we understand it today is intended to protect the accused. But Whitman traces its history back through centuries of Christian theology and common-law history to reveal that the original concern was to protect the souls of jurors. In Christian tradition, a person who experienced doubt yet convicted an innocent defendant was guilty of a mortal sin. Jurors fearful for their own souls were reassured that they were safe, as long as their doubts were not "reasonable." Today, the old rule of reasonable doubt survives, but it has been turned to different purposes. The result is confusion for jurors, and a serious moral challenge for our system of justice.  

Inga biblioteksbeskrivningar kunde hittas.

Bokbeskrivning
Haiku-sammanfattning

Pågående diskussioner

Ingen/inga

Populära omslag

Snabblänkar

Betyg

Medelbetyg: (4)
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3 1
3.5
4
4.5
5 1

Är det här du?

Bli LibraryThing-författare.

 

Om | Kontakt | LibraryThing.com | Sekretess/Villkor | Hjälp/Vanliga frågor | Blogg | Butik | APIs | TinyCat | Efterlämnade bibliotek | Förhandsrecensenter | Allmänna fakta | 203,238,896 böcker! | Topplisten: Alltid synlig