Rethinking the presumption of innocence

Criminal Law and Philosophy

Volumn 1, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 193-213

  Tadros, Victor ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Democracy; Fairtrial; Human rights; Presumption of innocence; Reverse burden of proof

Indexed keywords

EID: 34247368123     PISSN: 18719791     EISSN: 18719805     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11572-006-9016-8     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Ashworth, A., & Blake, M. (1996). The presumption of innocence in English Criminal Law. Criminal LR, 306.
2. Ashworth, A. (2000). Is the criminal law a lost cause? LQR, 116, 225.
3. Duff, R. A. (2001). Punishment, communication and community. Oxford: OUP.
4. Duff, R. A. (2002). Crime, prohibition, and punishment. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 19, 97.
5. Duff, A., Farmer, L., Marshall, S., & Tadros, V. (2004). Introduction: Towards a normative theory of the criminal trial. In The trial on trial (1): Truth and due process. Oxford: Hart.
6. Duff, R. A. (2005). Strict liability, legal presumptions, and the presumption of innocence. In A. P. Simester (Ed.), Appraising strict liability. Oxford: OUP.
7. Gearty, C. (2004). Principles of human rights adjudication. Oxford: OUP.
8. Green, S. P. (1997). Why it's a crime to tear the tag off a mattress: Overcriminalization and the moral content of regulatory offences. Emory Law Journal, 46, 1533.
9. Husak, D. (2005). Malum prohibitum and retributivism. In R. A. Duff, & S. P. Green (Eds.), Defining crimes. Oxford: OUP.
10. Jackson, J. (2004). Managing uncertainty and finality: The function of the criminal trial in legal inquiry. In A. Duff, L. Farmer, S. Marshall, & V. Tadros (Eds.), The trial on trial (1): Truth and due process. Oxford: Hart.
11. Jackson, J. (2005) The effect of human rights on criminal evidentiary processes: Towards convergence, divergence or realignment. The Modern Law Review, 68, 737.
12. Koskenniemi, M. (1999). The effect of rights on political culture. In P. Alston (Ed.), The EU and human rights. Oxford: OUP.
13. Leverick, F. (2002). Is English self-defence law compatible with Article 2 of the ECHR? Criminal LR, 347.
14. McEwan, J. (2004). 'Ritual, fairness and truth: The adversarial and inquisitorial models of criminal trial' In A. Duff, L. Farmer, S. Marshall, & V. Tadros (Eds.), The trial on trial (1): Truth and due process. Oxford: Hart.
15. Nicol, D. (2005). Original intent and the European Convention of Human Rights. Public Law, 152.
16. Rawls, T. (1993). Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
17. Roberts, P. (2005). Strict liability and the presumption of innocence: An exposé of functionalist assumptions. In A. P. Simester (Ed.), Appraising strict liability. Oxford: OUP.
18. Sales, P., & Hooper, B. (2003). Proportionality and the Form of Law. LQR, 119, 426.
19. Tadros, V., & Tierney, S. (2004). The presumption of innocence and the Human Rights Act. The Modern Law Review, 67.
20. Tadros, V. (2005). Criminal responsibility. Oxford: OUP.
21. Tadros, V. (2006). Rape without consent Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, forthcoming.