Taking Comparative Evidence Seriously

Innovations in Evidence and Proof: Integrating Theory, Research and Teaching

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 291-330

  Jackson, John ^a  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84862862188     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (114)

1. EW Marsh, ‘Teachers of Evidence and their Jeweled Mosaic’ (2003) 21 Quinnipiac Law Review i and succeeding articles
2. W Twining, ‘Goodbye to Lewis Elliott: the Academic Lawyer as Scholar’ (1980) 15 Journal of the Society of Public Teachers of Law 2.
3. R Lempert, ‘The New Evidence Scholarship: Analysing the Process of Proof’ (1986) 66 Boston University Law Review 439.
4. J Jackson, ‘Analysing the New Evidence Scholarship: Towards a New Conception of the Law of Evidence’ (1996) 16 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 309.
5. J Jackson, ‘Modern Trends in Evidence Scholarship: Is All Rosy in the Garden?’ (2003) 21 Quinnipiac Law Review 893.
6. R Park, ‘Posner on Teaching Evidence’ (2003) 21 Quinnipiac Law Review 741, 744.
7. RA Posner, ‘Clinical and Theoretical Approaches to the Teaching of Evidence and Trial Advocacy’ (2003) 21 Quinnipiac Law Review 731, 736.
8. P Roberts, ‘Rethinking the Law of Evidence: a Twenty-First Century Agenda for Teaching and Research’ (2002) 55 Current Legal Problems 297.
9. P Roberts and AAS Zuckerman, Criminal Evidence (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004).
10. J Hunter and K Cronin, Evidence, Advocacy and Ethical Practice (Sydney, Butterworths, 1995)
11. C Boyle, M MacCrimmon and D Martin, The Law of Evidence: Fact Finding, Fairness and Advocacy (Toronto, Edmond Montgomery Publications, 1999)
12. R O Lempert (ed), Evidence Stories (New York, Foundation Press, 2006).
13. W Twining, ‘Taking Facts Seriously’ (1984) 34 Journal of Legal Education 22.
14. J Jackson, ‘Criminal Justice, Human Rights and the Future of the Common Law’ (2006) 57 Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 352.
15. W Twining, Rethinking Evidence (Oxford, Blackwell, 1990) 354.
16. ML Seigel, ‘Pragmatism Applied: Imagining a Solution to the Problem of Court Congestion’ (1994) 22 Hofstra Law Review 567
17. G Johnstone, Restorative Justice: Ideas Values, Debates (Cullompton, Willan, 2002)
18. P Roberts, ‘Restoration and Retribution in International Criminal Justice: an Exploratory Analysis’ in A von Hirsch et al (eds), Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice (Oxford, Hart, 2003).
19. S Haack, ‘Epistemology Legalised: Or, Truth, Justice, and the American Way’ (2004) 49 American Journal of Jurisprudence 43.
20. R Evans, Telling Lies about Hitler (London, Heinemann, 2002).
21. F Cownie, Legal Academics: Cultures and Identities (Oxford, Hart, 2004).
22. J Jackson, ‘Hearsay: the Sacred Cow that Won’t be Slaughtered’ (1998) 2 E and P 166.
23. J Jackson and S Doran, Judge Without Jury: Diplock Trials in the Adversary System (Oxford, OUP, 1995).
24. W Twining and T Anderson, Analysis of Evidence (London, Weidenfeld, 1991) 120–1.
25. WT Pizzi, Trials Without Truth (New York, New York UP, 1999) 89.
26. E Cape and J Luqmani (eds), Defending Suspects at Police Stations: the Practitioner’s Guide to Advice and Representation (5th edn, London, Legal Action Group, 2006).
27. RB Schlesinger, HW Baade, PE Herzog and EM Wine, Comparative Criminal Procedure (6th edn, New York, Foundation Press, 1998) 508.
28. P Roberts, ‘On Method: the Ascent of Comparative Criminal Justice’ (2002) 22 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 539, 561
29. M Delmas-Marty and J Spencer (eds), European Criminal Procedures (Cambridge, CUP, 2002).
30. R May and M Wierda, International Criminal Evidence (New York, Transnational Publishers, 2002)
31. N Boaria, ‘On the Efficiency of Penal Systems: Several Lessons from the Italian Experience’ (1997) 17 International Review of Law and Economics 115
32. O Chase, ‘Legal Processes and National Culture’ (1997) 5 Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law 1.
33. L Ellison, The Adversarial Process and the Vulnerable Witness (Oxford, OUP, 2001).
34. WT Pizzi and W Perron, ‘Crime Victims in German Courtrooms: a Comparative Perspective on American Problems’ (1996) 32 Stanford Journal of International Law 37.
35. RL Lerner, ‘The Intersection of Two Systems: an American on Trial for an American Murder in the French Cour d’ Assises’ (2001) University of Illinois Law Review 791, 796.
36. J Jackson, ‘Theories of Truth Finding in Criminal Procedure: an Evolutionary Approach’ (1988) 10 Cardozo law Review 475, 481–6.
37. MR Damaška, ‘Evidentiary Barriers to Conviction and Two Models of Criminal Procedure: a Comparative Study’ (1973) 121 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 506
38. MR Damaška, ‘Evidentiary Barriers to Conviction and Two Models of Criminal Procedure: a Comparative Study’ (1973) 121 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 506
39. J Jackson, ‘Playing the Culture Card in Resisting Cross-Jurisdictional Transplants’ (1997) 5 Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law 51.
40. A Watson, Legal Transplants: an Approach to Comparative Law (2nd edn, Athens, GA, University of Georgia Press, 1993).
41. L Leigh and L Zedner, A Report on the Administration of Justice in the Pre-Trial Phase in France and Germany (London, HMSO, 1993)
42. RS Frase, ‘Comparative Criminal Justice as a Guide to American Law Reform: How Do the French Do It, How Can We Find Out and Why Should We Care?’ (1990) 78 California Law Review 542
43. RS Frase and T Weigend, ‘German Criminal Procedure as a Guide to American Law Reform: Similar Problems, Better Solutions?’ (1995) 18 Boston College International and Comparative Law Review 317
44. B McKillop, ‘Anatomy of a French Murder Case’ (1997) 45 American Journal of Comparative Law 527
45. J Hodgson, French Criminal Justice: a Comparative Account of the Investigation and Prosecution of Crime in France (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2005).
46. B McKillop, ‘Readings and Hearings in French Criminal Justice: Five Cases in the Tribunal Correctionnel’ (1998) 46 American Journal of Comparative Law 757.
47. A West, ‘Dialogue and the Inquisitorial Tradition: French Defence Lawyers in the Pre-trial Criminal Process’ (2003) 14 Criminal Law Forum 261
48. PM Wald, ‘Rules of Evidence in the Yugoslav War Tribunal’ (2003) 21 Quinnipiac Law Review 761.
49. A Duff, L Farmer, S Marshall and V Tadros (eds), The Trial on Trial: Truth and Due Process (Oxford, Hart, 2004).
50. C Bradley, ‘The Convergence of the Continental and the Common Law Model of Criminal Procedure’ (1996) 7 Criminal Law Forum 471, 475
51. CM Bradley (ed), Criminal Procedure: a Worldwide Study (Durham, NC, Carolina Academic Press, 1999)
52. P Fennell, C Harding, N Jörg and B Swart (eds), Criminal Justice in Europe: a Comparative Study (Oxford, OUP, 1995).
53. M Feeley and S Miyazawa (eds), The Japanese Adversary System in Context (Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 2002).
54. BS Markesinis (ed), The Gradual Convergence (Oxford, OUP, 1994) 30
55. P Legrand, ‘European Legal Systems are Not Converging’ (1996) 45 International and Comparative Legal Quarterly 52.
56. MR Damaška, ‘Evidentiary Barriers to Conviction and Two Models of Criminal Procedure: a Comparative Study’ (1973) 121 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 506, 569.
57. SJ Summers, ‘The Right to Confrontation after Crawford v Washington: a “Continental European” Perspective’ (2004) 2 International Commentary on Evidence, Art 3 (see www.bepress.com/ice).
58. JF Nijboer, ‘Common Law Tradition in Evidence Scholarship Observed from a Continental Perspective’ (1993) 41 American Journal of Comparative Law 299, 305.
59. MR Damaška, ‘Models of Criminal Procedure’ (2001) 51 Zbornik 477, 485.
60. RA Posner, ‘An Economic Approach to the Law of Evidence’ (1999) 51 Stanford Law Review 1477, 1500 n 49
61. MR Damaška, ‘Adversary System’ in SH Kadish (ed), Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice (London, Macmillan, 1983) vol 1, 24
62. MR Damaška, The Faces of Justice and State Authority (New Haven, Yale UP, 1986) 4–6
63. M Langer, ‘From Legal Transplants to Legal Translations: the Globalisation of Plea Bargaining and the Americanisation Thesis in Criminal Procedure’ (2004) 45 Harvard International Law Journal 1.
64. N Jörg, S Field and C Brants, ‘Are Inquisitorial and Adversarial Systems Converging?’ in Fennell et al, above n 50, 41
65. P Duff, ‘Changing Conceptions of the Scottish Criminal Trial: the Duty to Agree Uncontroversial Evidence’ in Duff et al, above n 49, 31.
66. AS Goldstein, ‘The State and the Accused: Balance of Advantage in Criminal Procedure’ (1960) 69 Yale Law Journal 1149
67. RJ Traynor, ‘Ground Lost and Found in Criminal Discovery’ (1962) 39 New York University Law Review 228, 249
68. AV Sheehan and DJ Dickson, Criminal Procedure (2nd edn, Edinburgh, Butterworths, 2003)
69. D Nance, ‘The Best Evidence Principle’ (1988) 73 Iowa Law Review 227.
70. MR Damaška, Evidence Law Adrift (New Haven, Yale UP, 1997) ch 3.
71. MR Damaška, ‘Free Proof and its Detractors’ (1995) 43 American Journal of Comparative Law 343.
72. WT Pizzi, ‘The American “Adversary System”’ (1998) 100 University of West Virginia Law Review 847, 848.
73. S Field, ‘Legal Cultures, Political Cultures and Procedural Traditions: Towards a Comparative Interpretation of Overt and Proactive Policing in England and Wales and the Netherlands’ in D Nelken (ed), Contrasting Criminal Justice (Aldershot, Dartmouth, 2000) 77, 79.
74. AS Goldstein, ‘Reflections on Two Models: Inquisitorial Themes in American Criminal Procedure’ (1974) 26 Stanford Law Review 1009.
75. S Doran, J Jackson and ML Seigel, ‘Rethinking Adversariness in Non-Jury Criminal Trials’ (1995) 23 American Journal of Criminal Law 1.
76. MR Damaška, ‘Structures of Authority and Comparative Criminal Procedure’ (1975) 84 Yale Law Journal 480.
77. M McConville, A Sanders and R Leng, The Case for the Prosecution (London, Routledge, 1991).
78. J Hodgson, ‘The Police, the Prosecutor and the Juge d’Instruction’ (2001) 41 British Journal of Criminology 342
79. J Hodgson, French Criminal Justice (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2005).
80. J Jackson, ‘Legal Culture and Proof in Decisions to Prosecute’ (2004) 3 Law, Probability and Risk 109.
81. R Evans, The Conduct of Police Interviews with Juveniles (London, HMSO, 1993)
82. E Cape, ‘The Revised PACE Codes of Practice: a Further Step towards Inquisitorialism’ [2003] Crim LR 355.
83. M Langer, ‘The Rise of Managerial Judging in International Criminal Law’ (2004) 52 American Journal of Comparative Law 835.
84. J McEwan, ‘Cooperative Justice and the Adversarial Criminal Trial: Lessons from the Woolf Report’ in S Doran and J Jackson (eds), The Judicial Role in Criminal Proceedings (Oxford, Hart, 2000) 17.
85. J Shapland, Between Conviction and Sentence: the Process of Mitigation (Oxford, OUP, 1981).
86. I Markovits, ‘Playing the Opposites Game: On Mirjan Damaška’s The Faces of Justice and State Authority’ (1989) 41 Stanford Law Review 1313, 1340–1.
87. AH Robertson and JG Merrills, Human Rights in Europe (3rd edn, Manchester, Manchester UP, 1993) 87.
88. AWB Simpson, Human Rights and the End of Empire (Oxford, OUP, 2001) chs 13 and 14.
89. B Swart and J Young, ‘The ECHR and Criminal Justice in the Netherlands and the UK’ in Fennell, Harding, Jorg and Swart, above n 50, 57
90. JF Nijboer, ‘Vision, Abstraction and Socio-Economic Reality’ (1998) 49 Hastings Law Journal 387, 394.
91. JR Lucas, On Justice (Oxford, OUP, 1980) 84.
92. DJ Harris, M O’Boyle and C Warbrick, Law of the European Convention on Human Rights (London, Butterworths, 1995) 212.
93. M Chiavario, ‘The Rights of the Defendant and the Victim’ in Delmas-Marty and Spencer, above n 24, 548.
94. PTC van Kampen, Expert Evidence Compared (Leiden, E M Meijers Institute, 1998) 105–6.
95. J Pradel, ‘France’ in C van den Wyngaert (ed), Criminal Procedure Systems in the European Community (London, Butterworths, 1993) 120.
96. V Dervieux, ‘The French System’ in Delmas-Marty and Spencer, above n 24, 218, 220–2.
97. A Perrodet, ‘The Italian System’ in ibid, 348, 368–9.
98. MR Damaška, ‘Of Hearsay and its Analogues’ (1992) 76 Minnesota Law Review 425.
99. JR Spencer, ‘French and English Criminal Procedure: a Brief Comparison’ in Markesinis, above n 50, 33.
100. A Ashworth, Human Rights and Criminal Justice (London, Sweet & Maxwell, 2000)
101. MR Damaška, ‘Atomistic and Holistic Evaluation of Evidence’ in R Clark (ed), Comparative and Private International Law: Essays in Honour of John Merryman (Berlin, Duncken and Humblot, 1990).
102. A Ashworth, ‘Article 6 and the Fairness of Trials’ [1999] Crim LR 261, 272.
103. J Jackson, ‘The Impact of Human Rights on Judicial Decision Making’ in Doran and Jackson, above n 80, 109, 118.
104. JH Langbein, The Origins of Adversary Criminal Trial (Oxford, OUP, 2003).
105. P Devlin, The Criminal Prosecution in England (London, Stevens, 1960) 6.
106. SD Sharpe, ‘Article 6 and the Disclosure of Evidence in Criminal Cases’ [1999] Crim LR 273.
107. M Redmayne, ‘Criminal Justice Act 2003: Disclosure and its Discontents’ [2004] Crim LR 441, 444–5.
108. JR Spencer, ‘Evidence’ in Delmas-Marty and Spencer, above n 24, 594, 632.
109. M Delmas-Marty, ‘Toward a European Model of the Criminal Trial’ in M Delmas- Marty (ed), The Criminal Process and Human Rights (Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff, 1995) 191, 196.
110. J Hodgson, ‘Constructing the Pre-trial Role of the Defence in French Criminal Procedure: an Adversarial Outsider in an Inquisitorial Process’ (2002) 6 E & P 1
111. S Field, P Alldridge and N Jörg, ‘Prosecutors, Examining Judges and Control of Police Investigations’ in Fennell et al, above n 50, 227
112. J Doak, ‘The Victim and the Criminal Process: an Analysis of Recent Trends in Regional and International Tribunals’ (2003) 23 Legal Studies 1
113. F Leverick, ‘What has the ECHR Done for Victims? A United Kingdom Perspective’ (2004) 11 International Review of Victimology 177.
114. RK Kirst, ‘Hearsay and the Right of Confrontation in the European Court of Human Rights’ (2003) 21 Quinnipiac Law Review 777, 806–7.