Blame, moral standing and the legitimacy of the criminal trial

Ratio

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 123-140

  Duff, R A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952021259     PISSN: 00340006     EISSN: 14679329     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9329.2010.00456.x     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. See G Sher, In Praise of Blame (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006)
2. T M Scanlon, Moral Dimensions: Permissibility, Meaning, Blame (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2008), ch. 4
3. But see G A Cohen, 'Casting the First Stone: Who Can, and Who Can't, Condemn the Terrorists', (2006) 81 Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements 113
4. Scanlon, Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements. op. cit. n. 1 above, 126-8, 138-151, 166-79
5. V Tadros, 'Poverty and Criminal Responsibility' (2009) 43 Journal of Value Inquiry 391. I have also learned from Y Eylon, 'Blaming and Knowing', and M Friedman, 'How to Blame' (both so far unpublished)
6. See R Gaita, A Common Humanity (London: Routledge, 2000)
7. For a fuller account and defence of this conception of the criminal trial, and discussion of its implications, see R A Duff, L Farmer, S E Marshall, V Tadros, The Trial on Trial (3): Towards a Normative Theory of the Criminal Trial (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2007), especially ch. 3
8. See P H Robinson, Criminal Law Defenses (St Paul: West Group, 1984), vol.I, 179-87; vol.II, 460-543
9. See Robinson, Criminal Law Defenses. op. cit. n. 17 above, vol.II, 501-8
10. J Sprack, A Practical Approach to Criminal Procedure (11th ed; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006) 287-288
11. Though this is not always a bar to trial: e.g. Criminal Justice Act 1988 s 134 (R v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate ex parte Pinochet Ugarte [2000] 1 AC 147)
12. See M Hirst, Jurisdiction and the Ambit of the Criminal Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), chs 1, 5
13. See e.g. the American Model Penal Code, s 1.06
14. See Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, s 54
15. See also the law lords' comments on the inadmissibility of evidence obtained by the use of torture, in A and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] UKHL 71
16. See more generally AJ Ashworth, 'Testing Fidelity to Legal Values: Official Involvement and Criminal Justice', in S Shute and AP Simester (eds), Criminal Law Theory: Doctrines of the General Part (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002) 299
17. I H Dennis, The Law of Evidence (3rd ed.; London: Sweet and Maxwell, 2007), ch. 2E
18. See A L-T Choo, Abuse of Process and Judicial Stay of Criminal Proceedings (Oxford: Oxford. University Press, 1993), ch. 6
19. Ashworth, Abuse of Process and Judicial Stay of Criminal Proceedings. op.cit. n. 23 above
20. and 'Redrawing the Boundaries of Entrapment' (2002) Criminal Law Review 159
21. D Squires, 'The Problem with Entrapment' (2006) 26 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 351
22. G Dworkin, 'The Serpent Beguiled Me and I did Eat: Entrapment and the Creation of Crime' in his The Theory and Practice of Autonomy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988)
23. Duff et al, The Theory and Practice of Autonomy. op.cit. n. 16 above, ch. 8.3.1
24. See W R LaFave, Criminal Law (4th ed.; St Paul: West Publishing, 2003), 501-21
25. R H McAdams, 'The Political Economy of Entrapment' (2005) 96 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 107
26. Looseley; Attorney General's Reference (No 3 of 2000) [2001] 1 WLR 2060
27. On the claim that we should be punished only for our criminal actions, see Duff, Criminal Attempts. op. cit. n. 16 above, ch. 5
28. For a useful collection of readings, and further references, see W C Heffeman and J Kleinig, From Social Justice to Criminal Justice: Poverty and the Administration of Criminal Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000)
29. Compare respectively Cohen, From Social Justice to Criminal Justice: Poverty and the Administration of Criminal Law. op. cit. n. 2 above
30. Tadros, From Social Justice to Criminal Justice: Poverty and the Administration of Criminal Law. op. cit. n. 2 above
31. The role of lay citizens in the criminal process, as jurors, magistrates or witnesses, is important here: see S Clark, 'The Courage of Our Convictions' (1999) 97 Michigan Law Review 2381
32. I've also learned from A W Dzur, 'Democracy Inside and Out: The jury and Public Deliberation' (unpublished)
33. See R M Dworkin, A Matter of Principle (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985)