Psychiatric evidence in criminal trials: A 25-year retrospective.

Why did Roman prosecutors typically accuse the defendant of multiple crimina, when in most standing criminal courts the punishment imposed on a guilty defendant was the same (typically “capital,” that is, a kind of exile), no matter how many charges were proven? The answer lies not in a failure to distinguish between legal charges leveled at the defendant and defamation of his character, but rather in a rhetorical strategy that made sense in light of what was legally necessary to obtain a conviction. The greater the number of charges, the more likely the jurors would be persuaded that the defendant had in some way violated the statute according to which the trial was being conducted. It is true that prosecutors typically argued that the defendant’s prior conduct made it plausible that he had committed the crimes with which he was charged, but in a way that, as much as possible, made his guilt on these particular charges seem likely, and defense patroni attempted to undermine the charges and the character defamation. This answer to the apparent contradiction between multiple charges and unitary punishment favors a moderate formalism over legal realism as the way to interpret Roman criminal trials.

Download Full-text

Language in the courtroom: a comparative study of American and Romanian criminal trials

International Journal of Speech Language and the Law ◽

10.1558/ijsll.v19i1.109 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 19 (1) ◽

pp. 109-112

Author(s):

Marcela Alina Fărcaşiu

Keyword(s):

Comparative Study ◽

Criminal Trials

Download Full-text

PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PEMILU AKIBAT PENGGELEMBUNGAN SUARA DI KABUPATEN TAPIN

Hukum Bisnis dan Administrasi Negara ◽

10.25139/mih.v1i1.241 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 1 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Gusti Muhammad Ihsan Perdana

Keyword(s):

Time Trial ◽

General Election ◽

The Other ◽

District Court ◽

Criminal Trials ◽

Criminal Offense ◽

Criminal Charge ◽

The Future ◽

The Republic ◽

Legislative Election

Legislative election in distric Tapin was spotted with a vote, conducted by members of the Commission, M. Zainnoor Wal Aidi Rahmad win a legislative candidate from the Golkar Party, namely Bambang Herry Purnama the 2014-2019. Elections Honorary Council for General Election Organizer of the Republic of Indonesia as No. 15 / DKPP-PKE-III / 2014 has imposed sanctions on Zainnoor Wal Aidi M. Rahmad form of dismissal remain as a member of the Tapin district Elections Commission since the verdict was read. Rantau’s District Court in its decision No. 135 / Pid-Sus /2014/PN.Rta, Bringing the sanctions in the form of imprisonment for 10 months with the criminal provisions do not need to be run in the future unless is another command in the verdict that convicted before time trial during the 12 (twelve months) ends have been guilty of a criminal offense and a fine of Rp. 10,000,000.00 (ten million). Dismissal sanctions remain to perpetrators as member of the district KPU Tapin have sense of fairness, but the connection with the criminal charge of criminal trials less reflectjustice for his actions that allow offenders not sentenced to imprisonment and the other party can not do the same.Keywords: Elections Tapin distric, Inflation Voice, Sanctions

Download Full-text