Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
57,331
result(s) for
"CRIMINAL LIABILITY"
Sort by:
Remorse
Remorse is a powerful, important and yet academically neglected emotion. This book, one of the very few extended examinations of remorse, draws on psychology, law and philosophy to present a unique interdisciplinary study of this intriguing emotion. The psychological chapters examine the fundamental nature of remorse, its interpersonal effects, and its relationship with regret, guilt and shame. A practical focus is also provided in an examination of the place of remorse in psychotherapeutic interventions with criminal offenders. The book's jurisprudential chapters explore the problem of how offender remorse is proved in court and the contentious issues concerning the effect that remorse - and its absence - should have on sentencing criminal offenders. The legal and psychological perspectives are then interwoven in a discussion of the role of remorse in restorative justice. In Remorse: Psychological and Jurisprudential Perspectives, Proeve and Tudor bring together insights of neighbouring disciplines to advance our understanding of remorse. It will be of interest to theoreticians in psychology, law and philosophy, and will be of benefit to practising psychologists and lawyers.
eBook
The Right Not to be Criminalized
This book presents arguments and proposals for constraining criminalization, with a focus on the legal limits of the criminal law. The book approaches the issue by showing how the moral criteria for constraining unjust criminalization can and has been incorporated into constitutional human rights and thus provides a legal right not to be unfairly criminalized. The book sets out the constitutional limits of the substantive criminal law. As far as specific constitutional rights operate to protect specific freedoms, for example, free speech, freedom of religion, privacy, etc, the right not to be criminalized has proved to be a rather powerful justice constraint in the U.S. Yet the general right not to be criminalized has not been fully embraced in either the U.S. or Europe, although it does exist. This volume lays out the legal foundations of that right and the criteria for determining when the state might override it. The book will be of interest to researchers in the areas of legal philosophy, criminal law, constitutional law, and criminology.
eBook
Judging Insanity, Punishing Difference
In Judging Insanity, Punishing Difference , Chloé
Deambrogio explores how developments in the field of forensic
psychiatry shaped American courts' assessments of defendants'
mental health and criminal responsibility over the course of the
twentieth century. During this period, new psychiatric notions of
the mind and its readability, legal doctrines of insanity and
diminished culpability, and cultural stereotypes about race and
gender shaped the ways in which legal professionals, mental health
experts, and lay witnesses approached mental disability evidence,
especially in cases carrying the death penalty.
Using Texas as a case study, Deambrogio examines how these
medical, legal, and cultural trends shaped psycho-legal debates in
state criminal courts, while shedding light on the ways in which
experts and lay actors' interpretations of \"pathological\" mental
states influenced trial verdicts in capital cases. She shows that
despite mounting pressures from advocates of the \"rehabilitative
penology,\" Texas courts maintained a punitive approach towards
defendants allegedly affected by severe mental disabilities, while
allowing for moralized views about personalities, habits, and
lifestyle to influence psycho-legal assessments, in potentially
prejudicial ways.
eBook
Theories of Co-perpetration in International Criminal Law
This book provides a refined definition of co-perpetration responsibility that could be uniformly applied in both the ad hoc- and the treaty-based (ICC Rome Statue) model of international criminal justice.
eBook
The limits of blame : rethinking punishment and responsibility
Faith in the power and righteousness of retribution has taken over the American criminal justice system. Approaching punishment and responsibility from a philosophical perspective, Limits of Blame takes issue with a criminal justice system that aligns legal criteria of guilt with moral criteria of blameworthiness. Many incarcerated people do not meet the criteria of blameworthiness, even when they are guilty of crimes. The author underscores the problems of exaggerating what criminal guilt indicates, particularly when it is tied to the illusion that we know how long and in what ways criminals should suffer. Our practice of assigning blame has gone beyond a pragmatic need for protection and a moral need to repudiate harmful acts publicly. It represents a desire for retribution that normalizes excessive punishment. Kelly proposes that we abandon our culture of blame and aim at reducing serious crime rather than imposing retribution. Were we to refocus our perspective to fit the relevant moral circumstances and legal criteria, we could endorse a humane, appropriately limited, and more productive approach to criminal justice.-- Provided by publisher
Book
Watering down enforcement: Inadequate criminal liability in State Clean Water Act programs
Environmental criminal liability plays an important role in deterring corporate polluters and motivating regulatory compliance. Accordingly, the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to apply criminal enforcement standards at least as stringent as the federal standards. For decades, however, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been undermining CWA enforcement by approving state permit programs with weaker criminal liability provisions. This Note surveys the state codes of all 47 states with authorized permit programs and finds widespread noncompliance with the CWA: 34 states fail to authorize appropriate felony penalties for all knowing violations, and at least 33 states apply misdemeanor intent standards above ordinary negligence. These deficiencies erode the deterrent effect of environmental criminal liability.
EPA has neglected its nondiscretionary duty under the CWA to withdraw its authorizations of noncompliant state programs. Recent cases have alerted environmental groups that EPA has been violating the CWA and its own regulations for decades. As a result, a flood of litigation may be on the horizon. Now EPA has rewritten its regulations to allow weaker state standards, reversing its longstanding position since 1979 that states must apply criminal intent standards at least as stringent as the federal standards.
This Note argues that EPA's new rule violates the text of the CWA and that EPA must bring state permit programs into compliance with the CWA. Specifically, EPA must require states to authorize (1) appropriate felony penalties for all knowing violations and (2) criminal liability for ordinary negligence. Only then can states serve as an effective backstop for clean water protection after 'Sackett v. EPA', a recent U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowed federal CWA jurisdiction. The stakes are enormous-not only for the environment and public health, but also for constitutional questions about the nondelegation doctrine and the proper scope of agency authority on criminal matters.
Journal Article