Related categories

75 found
Order:
1 — 50 / 75
  1. added 2020-05-19
    Justifying Prison Breaks as Civil Disobedience.Isaac Shur - 2019 - Aporia 19 (2):14-26.
    I argue that given the persistent injustice present within the Prison Industrial Complex in the United States, many incarcerated individuals would be justified in attempting to escape and that these prison breaks may qualify as acts of civil disobedience. After an introduction in section one, section two offers a critique of the classical liberal conception of civil disobedience envisioned by John Rawls. Contrary to Rawls, I argue that acts of civil disobedience can involve both violence and evasion of punishment, both (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. added 2020-05-05
    The Insanity Defence Without Mental Illness? Some Considerations.Luca Malatesti, Marko Jurjako & Gerben Meynen - forthcoming - International Journal of Law and Psychiatry.
    In this paper we aim to offer a balanced argument to motivate (re)thinking about the mental illness clause within the insanity defence. This is the clause that states that mental illness should have a relevant causal or explanatory role for the presence of the incapacities or limited capacities that are covered by this defence. We offer three main considerations showing the important legal and epistemological roles that the mental illness clause plays in the evaluation of legal responsibility. Although we acknowledge (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. added 2020-03-24
    The Paradox of Consent.Stephen Kershnar - 2019 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 33 (2):305-318.
    If consent is valid, then in every case it is either valid or invalid. This is because of the notion that consent eliminates a right and a person either has or lacks a right against another. A parallel problem to the paradox of symmetrical attackers applies to consent. That is, there is a case in which two people neither consent nor do not consent to one another. As a practical matter, attorneys, judges, legislators, physicians, and sex partners should not treat (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. added 2020-03-18
    Nowożytne przeobrażenia systemu karnego według Michela Foucaulta.Michał Wieczorkowski - 2019 - Warszawa, Polska: C.H. Beck.
    Kara – jako immanentny element społeczeństwa – jest obiektem szeroko zakrojonych badań teoretyków różnych dziedzin – prawników, filozofów jak i socjologów. Bardzo często refleksje na jej temat wiązały się z artykułowaniem określonych postulatów – analiza tego, czym jest kara, przybierała tu postać twierdzeń o tym, czym kara być powinna. Dopiero wiek XIX przyniósł głębsze zainteresowanie historią kary. To wtedy właśnie analizy karania zaczęły przyjmować charakter deskryptywny, starając się ująć, jaką funkcję przypisywano karze w danym społeczeństwie w określonym momencie historycznym. Wydaje (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. added 2020-01-13
    Rights in Criminal Law in the Light of a Will Theory.Elias Moser - 2019 - Criminal Justice Ethics 38 (3):176-197.
    The will theory of rights has so far been considered incapable of capturing individual rights under criminal law. Adherents of the will theory, therefore, have defended the claim that criminal law does not assign rights to individuals. In this article I argue first, that criminal law does assign individual rights and second, that the will theory of rights may enhance our understanding of these rights. The two major implications of the account are: a volenti non fit iniuria principle for criminal (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. added 2019-12-31
    Distinctive duress.Craig K. Agule - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 177 (4):1007-1026.
    Duress is a defense in both law and morality. The bank teller who provides an armed robber with the bank vault combination, the innocent suspect who fabricates a story after hours of interrogation, the Good Samaritan who breaks into a private cabin in the woods to save a stranded hiker, and the father who drives at high speed to rush his injured child to the hospital—in deciding how to respond to agents like these, we should take into account that they (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. added 2019-11-13
    Legal Epistemology.Georgi Gardiner - 2019 - Oxford Bibliographies Online.
  8. added 2019-11-10
    'Reasonable Steps': Amending Section 273.2 to Reflect the Jurisprudence.Lucinda Ann Vandervort - 2019 - Criminal Law Quarterly 66 (4):376-387.
    This piece proposes amendments to section 273.2 of the Canadian Criminal Code. Section 273.2, enacted in 1992 and revised in 2018, specifies circumstances in which belief in consent is not a defence to sexual assault. The amendments proposed here are designed to ensure that the wording of this statutory provision properly reflects the significant jurisprudential developments related to mens rea and the communication of voluntary agreement (i.e., affirmative sexual consent) achieved by Canadian judges since the original enactment of section 273.2 (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. added 2019-11-10
    Honest Beliefs, Credible Lies, and Culpable Awareness: Rhetoric, Inequality, and Mens Rea in Sexual Assault.Lucinda Vandervort - 2004 - Osgoode Hall Law Journal 42 (4):625-660.
    The exculpatory rhetorical power of the term “honest belief” continues to invite reliance on the bare credibility of belief in consent to determine culpability in sexual assault. In law, however, only a comprehensive analysis of mens rea, including an examination of the material facts and circumstances of which the accused was aware, demonstrates whether a “belief” in consent was or was not reckless or wilfully blind. An accused's “honest belief” routinely begs this question, leading to a truncated analysis of criminal (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  10. added 2019-11-05
    The Defence of Belief in Consent: Guidelines and Jury Instructions for Application of Criminal Code Section 265(4).Lucinda Vandervort - 2005 - Criminal Law Quarterly 50 (4):441-452.
    The availability of the defence of belief in consent under section 265(4) is a question of law, subject to review on appeal. The statutory provision is based on the common law rule that applies to all defences. Consideration of the defence when it is unavailable in law and failure to consider it when it is available are both incorrect. A judge is most likely to avoid error when ruling on availability of the defence if the ruling: (1) is grounded on (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11. added 2019-10-01
    Limiting Identity in Criminal Law.Mihailis E. Diamantis - 2019 - Boston College Law Review.
    People change with time. Their personalities, values, and preferences shift incrementally as they accrue life experience, discover new sources of meaning, and form/lose memories. Accumulated psychological changes eventually reshape not just how someone relates to the world about her, but also who she is as a person. This transience of human identity has profound implications for criminal law. Previous legal scholarship on personal identity has assumed that only abrupt tragedy and disease can change who we are. However, psychologists now know (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12. added 2019-06-24
    Criminal Responsibility.Ken M. Levy - 2019 - In Robert D. Morgan (ed.), SAGE Encyclopedia of Criminal Psychology. Thousand Oaks, California, USA: Sage Publishing. pp. 269-272.
    This invited entry offers a brief overview of criminal responsibility. -/- The first part starts with a question: is Clyde criminally responsible for killing his girlfriend Bonnie? The answer: it depends. Particular circumstances determine whether Clyde is guilty of murder, guilty of manslaughter, not guilty because he has a good excuse, or not guilty because he has a good justification. -/- The second part addresses the complicated relationship between criminal responsibility and moral responsibility. Until recently, both concepts were considered to (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. added 2019-06-23
    Normative Ignorance: A Critical Connection Between the Insanity and Mistake of Law Defenses.Ken Levy - forthcoming - Florida State University Law Review 47.
    This Article falls into three general parts. The first part starts with an important question: is the insanity defense constitutionally required? The United States Supreme Court will finally try to answer this question next term in the case of Kahler v. Kansas. -/- I say “finally” because the Court refused to answer this question in 2012 when it denied certiorari to an appeal brought by John Joseph Delling, a severely mentally ill defendant who was sentenced to life in prison three (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14. added 2019-06-23
    Free Will, Responsibility, and Crime: An Introduction.Ken M. Levy - forthcoming - New York, USA: Routledge.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. added 2019-03-25
    Philosophical Foundation and Constitutional Rejection in Hungary.Csaba Varga - 2013 - History of Communism in Europe 4:22-43.
    There are internationally set criteria that apply in the case of a legacy of grave and systematic violations of human rights, generating obligations of the state towards the victims and society. They specify: a right of the victim to see justice done, a right to know the truth, an entitlement to compensation and nonmonetary forms of restitution, as well as a right to reorganized and accountable institutions. Facing the complete failure of implementing the first three points, one can claim that (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16. added 2019-03-07
    How is the Culpability We Assign to Recklessness Best Accounted for in Criminal Law?Joe Slater - 2014 - Dissertation,
    In order to be properly applied, criminal law must determine what conduct warrants punitive action. Figuring out exactly how one must act to be criminally liable is a difficulty that faces any legal system. In many jurisdictions criminal recklessness is regarded as an important notion for liability. However, recklessness is difficult to define, and attempts at this exercise have been a problem in legal philosophy since the mid-twentieth century, and persist today. This thesis discusses accounts of recklessness with the aim (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. added 2019-03-06
    Punishing Wrongs From the Distant Past.Thomas Douglas - 2019 - Law and Philosophy 38 (4):335-358.
    On a Parfit-inspired account of culpability, as the psychological connections between a person’s younger self and older self weaken, the older self’s culpability for a wrong committed by the younger self diminishes. Suppose we accept this account and also accept a culpability-based upper limit on punishment severity. On this combination of views, we seem forced to conclude that perpetrators of distant past wrongs should either receive discounted punishments or be exempted from punishment entirely. This article develops a strategy for resisting (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. added 2019-03-01
    Necessity and the Common Law.Celia Wells - 1985 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 5 (3):471-475.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. added 2019-02-11
    Justifications and Excuses in Epistemology.Daniel Greco - forthcoming - Noûs.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20. added 2019-02-03
    What is the Incoherence Objection to Legal Entrapment?Daniel Hill, Stephen K. McLeod & Attila Tanyi - manuscript
    Some legal theorists say that legal entrapment to commit a crime is incoherent. So far, there is no satisfactorily precise statement of this objection in the literature: it is obscure even as to the type of incoherence that is purportedly involved. (Perhaps consequently, substantial assessment of the objection is also absent.) We aim to provide a new statement of the objection that is more precise and more rigorous than its predecessors. We argue that the best form of the objection asserts (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. added 2019-01-04
    Responsible Brains: Neuroscience, Law, and Human Culpability.William Hirstein, Katrina L. Sifferd & Tyler K. Fagan - 2018 - New York, NY, USA: MIT Press.
    [This download includes the table of contents and chapter 1.] When we praise, blame, punish, or reward people for their actions, we are holding them responsible for what they have done. Common sense tells us that what makes human beings responsible has to do with their minds and, in particular, the relationship between their minds and their actions. Yet the empirical connection is not necessarily obvious. The “guilty mind” is a core concept of criminal law, but if a defendant on (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22. added 2018-09-28
    Philosophy and Psychiatry: Problems, Intersections and New Perspectives.Daniel D. Moseley & Gary Gala - 2016 - Routledge.
    This groundbreaking volume of original essays presents fresh avenues of inquiry at the intersection of philosophy and psychiatry. Contributors draw from a variety of fields, including evolutionary psychiatry, phenomenology, biopsychosocial models, psychoanalysis, neuroscience, neuroethics, behavioral economics, and virtue theory. Philosophy and Psychiatry’s unique structure consists of two parts: in the first, philosophers write five lead essays with replies from psychiatrists. In the second part, this arrangement is reversed. The result is an interdisciplinary exchange that allows for direct discourse, and a (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. added 2018-09-21
    Neuropsychology and the Criminal Responsibility of Psychopaths: Reconsidering the Evidence.Marko Jurjako & Luca Malatesti - 2018 - Erkenntnis 83 (5):1003-1025.
    Recently it has been argued that certain neuropsychological findings on the decision-making, instrumental learning, and moral understanding in psychopathic offenders offer reasons to consider them not criminally responsible, due to certain epistemic and volitional impairments. We reply to this family of arguments, that collectively we call the irresponsibility of the psychopath argument. This type of argument has a premise that describes or prescribes the deficiencies that grant or should grant partial or complete criminal exculpation. The other premise contends that neuropsychological (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  24. added 2018-08-22
    Empirical Desert, Individual Prevention, and Limiting Retributivism: A Reply.Paul Robinson, Joshua S. Barton & Matthew J. Lister - 2014 - New Criminal Law Review 17 (2):312-375.
    A number of articles and empirical studies over the past decade, most by Paul Robinson and co-authors, have suggested a relationship between the extent of the criminal law's reputation for being just in its distribution of criminal liability and punishment in the eyes of the community – its "moral credibility" – and its ability to gain that community's deference and compliance through a variety of mechanisms that enhance its crime-control effectiveness. This has led to proposals to have criminal liability and (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. added 2018-08-22
    Social Justice in the Modern Regulatory State: Duress, Necessity and the Consensual Model in Law.Lucinda Vandervort - 1987 - Law and Philosophy 6 (2):205 - 225.
    This paper examines the role of the consensual model in law and argues that if substantive justice is to be the goal of law, the use of individual choice as a legal criterion for distributive and retributive purposes must be curtailed and made subject to substantive considerations. Substantive justice arguably requires that human rights to life, well-being, and the commodities essential to life and well-being, be given priority whenever a societal decision is made. If substantive justice is a collective societal (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. added 2018-03-05
    Unlocking Morality From Criminal Law.Thom Brooks - 2017 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 14 (3):339-352.
    This review article critically examines R. A. Duff and Stuart P. Green’s wide-ranging Philosophical Foundations of Criminal Law. The book captures well a crucial debate at the heart of its topic: is morality a key for understanding criminal law? I first consider legal moralism arguments answering this question in the affirmative and argue they should be rejected. I next consider alternatives to argue that philosophers of criminal law should look beyond legal moralism for more compelling theories about criminal law.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. added 2018-03-05
    Defending Punishment. Replies to Critics.Thom Brooks - 2015 - Philosophy and Public Issues - Filosofia E Questioni Pubbliche 5 (1).
    I am very grateful to the contributors for this symposium for their essays on my Punishment book. Each focuses with different elements of my work. Antony Duff examines the definition of punishment in my first few pages. Michelle Madden Dempsey analyses the importance given to coherence in my account and critique of expressivist theories of punishment. Richard Lippke considers my statements about negative retributivism in an important new defence of that approach. I examine each of these in turn below. While (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. added 2018-03-05
    A Précis of Punishment.Thom Brooks - 2015 - Philosophy and Public Issues - Filosofia E Questioni Pubbliche 5 (1).
    Punishment is a topic of increasing importance for citizens and policy-makers. The same can be said for academic researchers and students. Mass imprisonment has reached record high levels while public confidence is often lacking. New thinking is required urgently to address these challenges. Moreover, there have been several key developments in the philosophy of punishment over the last 20 years absent in leading guides including the communicative theory of punishment, restorative justice and my novel unified theory of punishment. -/- My (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29. added 2018-03-05
    Law and Legal Theory.Thom Brooks (ed.) - 2013 - Brill.
    brings together some of the most important essays in the area of the philosophy of law written by leading, international scholars and offering significant contributions to how we understand law and legal theory to help shape future debates.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30. added 2017-11-28
    A New Societal Self-Defense Theory of Punishment—The Rights-Protection Theory.Hsin-Wen Lee - 2018 - Philosophia 46 (2):337-353.
    In this paper, I propose a new self-defense theory of punishment, the rights-protection theory. By appealing to the interest theory of right, I show that what we call “the right of self-defense” is actually composed of the right to protect our basic rights. The right of self-defense is not a single, self-standing right but a group of derivative rights justified by their contribution to the protection of the core, basic rights. Thus, these rights of self-defense are both justified and constrained (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31. added 2017-11-04
    Should Law Track Morality?Re'em Segev - 2017 - Criminal Justice Ethics 36 (2):205-223.
    Does the moral status of an action provide in itself a non-instrumental, pro-tanto reason for a corresponding legal status – a reason that applies regardless of whether the law promotes a value that is independent of the law, such as preventing wrongdoing or promoting distributive or retributive justice? While the relation between morality and law is a familiar topic, this specific question is typically not considered explicitly. Yet it seems to be controversial and each of the contrasting answers to this (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  32. added 2017-09-04
    ‘Drugs That Make You Feel Bad’? Remorse-Based Mitigation and Neurointerventions.Jonathan Pugh & Hannah Maslen - 2017 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 11 (3):499-522.
    In many jurisdictions, an offender’s remorse is considered to be a relevant factor to take into account in mitigation at sentencing. The growing philosophical interest in the use of neurointerventions in criminal justice raises an important question about such remorse-based mitigation: to what extent should technologically facilitated remorse be honoured such that it is permitted the same penal significance as standard instances of remorse? To motivate this question, we begin by sketching a tripartite account of remorse that distinguishes cognitive, affective (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  33. added 2017-08-06
    The Concept of Entrapment.Daniel J. Hill, Stephen K. McLeod & Attila Tanyi - 2018 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 12 (4):539-554.
    Our question is this: What makes an act one of entrapment? We make a standard distinction between legal entrapment, which is carried out by parties acting in their capacities as (or as deputies of) law- enforcement agents, and civil entrapment, which is not. We aim to provide a definition of entrapment that covers both and which, for reasons we explain, does not settle questions of permissibility and culpability. We explain, compare, and contrast two existing definitions of legal entrapment to commit (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34. added 2017-07-17
    Self-Control in Responsibility Enhancement and Criminal Rehabilitation.Polaris Koi, Susanne Uusitalo & Jarno Tuominen - 2018 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 12 (2):227-244.
    Ethicists have for the past 20 years debated the possibility of using neurointerventions to improve intelligence and even moral capacities, and thereby create a safer society. Contributing to a recent debate concerning neurointerventions in criminal rehabilitation, Nicole Vincent and Elizabeth Shaw have separately discussed the possibility of responsibility enhancement. In their ethical analyses, enhancing a convict’s capacity responsibility may be permissible. Both Vincent and Shaw consider self-control to be one of the constituent mental capacities of capacity responsibility. In this paper, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  35. added 2017-06-18
    Kant's Mature Theory of Punishment, and a First Critique Ideal Abolitionist Alternative.Benjamin Vilhauer - forthcoming - In Matthew Altman (ed.), Palgrave Kant Handbook.
    This chapter has two goals. First, I will present an interpretation of Kant’s mature account of punishment, which includes a strong commitment to retributivism. Second, I will sketch a non-retributive, “ideal abolitionist” alternative, which appeals to a version of original position deliberation in which we choose the principles of punishment on the assumption that we are as likely to end up among the punished as we are to end up among those protected by the institution of punishment. This is radical (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  36. added 2017-05-27
    Legal Oughts, Normative Transmission, and the Nazi Use of Analogy.Carolyn Benson & Julian Fink - 2012 - Jurisprudence 3 (2):445-463.
    In 1935, the Nazi government introduced what came to be known as the abrogation of the pro- hibition of analogy. This measure, a feature of the new penal law, required judges to stray from the letter of the written law and to consider instead whether an action was worthy of pun- ishment according to the ‘sound perception of the people’ and the ‘underlying principle’ of existing criminal statutes. In discussions of Nazi law, an almost unanimous conclusion is that a system (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37. added 2017-02-07
    Legal Insanity and Executive Function.Katrina Sifferd, William Hirstein & Tyler Fagan - 2017 - In Mark White (ed.), The Insanity Defense: Multidisciplinary Views on Its History, Trends, and Controversies. Praeger. pp. 215-242.
    In this chapter we will argue that the capacities necessary to moral and legal agency can be understood as executive functions in the brain. Executive functions underwrite both the cognitive and volitional capacities that give agents a fair opportunity to avoid wrongdoing: to recognize their acts as immoral and/or illegal, and to act or refrain from acting based upon this recognition. When a person’s mental illness is serious enough to cause severe disruption of executive functions, she is very likely to (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38. added 2016-09-05
    Harm and the Volenti Principle.Gerald Dworkin - 2012 - Social Philosophy and Policy 29 (1):309-321.
    Research Articles Gerald Dworkin, Social Philosophy and Policy, FirstView Article.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  39. added 2016-08-29
    Knowledge and Attributability.Cameron Boult - 2017 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 98 (S1):329-350.
    A prominent objection to the so-called ‘knowledge norm of belief’ is that it is too demanding or too strong. The objection is commonly framed in terms of the idea that there is a tight connection between norm violation and the appropriateness of criticism or blame. In this paper I do two things. First, I argue that this way of motivating the objection leads to an impasse in the epistemic norms debate. It leads to an impasse when knowledge normers invoke excuses (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  40. added 2016-07-14
    Arthur Ripstein, Equality, Responsibility, and the Law.Larry Alexander - 2001 - Law and Philosophy 20 (6):617-635.
  41. added 2016-05-03
    When May Soldiers Participate in War?Uwe Steinhoff - 2016 - International Theory 8 (2):262-296.
    I shall argue that in some wars both sides are (as a collective) justified, that is, they can both satisfy valid jus ad bellum requirements. Moreover, in some wars – but not in all – the individual soldiers on the unjustified side (that is, on the side without jus ad bellum) may nevertheless kill soldiers (and also civilians as a side-effect) on the justified side, even if the enemy soldiers always abide by jus in bello constraints. Traditional just war theory (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  42. added 2016-04-25
    The Good, the Bad, and the Klutzy: Criminal Negligence and Moral Concern.Andrew Ingram - 2015 - Criminal Justice Ethics 34 (1):87-115.
    One proposed way of preserving the link between criminal negligence and blameworthiness is to define criminal negligence in moral terms. On this view, a person can be held criminally responsible for a negligent act if her negligence reflects a deficit of moral concern. Some theorists are convinced that this definition restores the link between negligence and blameworthiness, while others insist that criminal negligence remains suspect. This article contributes to the discussion by applying the work of ethicist Nomy Arpaly to criminal (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  43. added 2016-04-24
    Parsing the Reasonable Person: The Case of Self-Defense.Andrew Ingram - 2012 - American Journal of Criminal Law 39 (3):101-120.
    Mistakes are a fact of life, and the criminal law is sadly no exception to the rule. Wrongful convictions are rightfully abhorred, and false acquittals can likewise inspire outrage. In these cases, we implicitly draw a distinction between a court’s finding and a defendant’s actual guilt or innocence. These are intuitive concepts, but as this paper aims to show, contemporary use of the reasonable person standard in the law of self-defense muddles them. -/- Ordinarily, we can distinguish between a person's (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  44. added 2016-02-25
    Choosing Correct Punishments.Thom Brooks - 2003 - Archives de Philosophie du Droit 47:365-369.
    One of the most controversial aspects of legal philosophy concerns the justification of specific punishments for particular criminal violations. Surprisingly, there has not been any attempt to arrive systematically at any conclusive formula for deriving correct punishments. This article aspires to fulfil this urgent need. I shall examine (1) retributive, (2) consequentialist, (3) reformative, and (4) deterrent punishments in an attempt to derive general equations. It is my wish that by contributing a general formula for each theory we might have (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45. added 2016-02-25
    Moral Sentiments and the Justification of Punishment.Thom Brooks - unknown
    Adam Smith's theory of punishment is rarely explored. This article examines his understanding of punishment in light of his theory of moral sentiments. My aim is to show how he is neither a retributivist or deterrence advocate, but instead defends a more unified theory of punishment bringing different penal goals together in a new framework.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  46. added 2016-01-31
    Why Retributivism Needs Consequentialism: The Rightful Place of Revenge in the Criminal Justice System.Ken Levy - 2014 - Rutgers Law Review 66:629-684.
    Consider the reaction of Trayvon Martin’s family to the jury verdict. They were devastated that George Zimmerman, the defendant, was found not guilty of manslaughter or murder. Whatever the merits of this outcome, what does the Martin family’s emotional reaction mean? What does it say about criminal punishment – especially the reasons why we punish? Why did the Martin family want to see George Zimmerman go to jail? And why were – and are – they so upset that he didn’t? (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  47. added 2015-09-16
    Insanity Defenses.Walter Sinnott-Armstrong & Ken Levy - 2011 - In John Deigh & David Dolinko (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of the Criminal Law. Oxford University Press. pp. 299--334.
    We explicate and evaluate arguments both for and against the insanity defense itself, different versions of the insanity defense (M'Naghten, Model Penal Code, and Durham (or Product)), the Irresistible Impulse rule, and various reform proposals.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  48. added 2015-09-02
    Justifications, Powers, and Authority.Malcolm Thorburn - 2008 - Yale Law Journal 117:1070.
    Criminal law theory made a significant advance roughly thirty years ago when George Fletcher popularized the important conceptual distinction between justifications and excuses. In the intervening years, however, very little progress has been made in exploring the structure and function of justification defenses. The reason for this failure, I suggest, is a widely shared misconception about their place within the criminal law’s institutional structure. Contrary to what is generally believed, it is not up to trial courts to decide ex post (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  49. added 2015-08-31
    Shortcomings of and Alternatives to the Rights-Forfeiture Theory of Justified Self-Defense and Punishment.Uwe Steinhoff - manuscript
    I argue that rights-forfeiture by itself is no path to permissibility at all (even barring special circumstances), neither in the case of self-defense nor in the case of punishment. The limiting conditions of self-defense, for instance – necessity, proportionality (or no gross disproportionality), and the subjective element – are different in the context of forfeiture than in the context of justification (and might even be absent in the former context). In particular, I argue that a culpable aggressor, unlike an innocent (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  50. added 2015-08-31
    Self-Defense and Imminence.Uwe Steinhoff - manuscript
    This paper argues that there is a significant moral difference between force applied against (imminent) attackers on the one hand and force applied against “threatening” people who are not (imminent) attackers on the other. Given that there is such a difference, one should not blur the lines by using the term “self-defense” (understood as including other-defense) for both uses of force. Rather, only the former is appropriately called self-defense, while for the latter, following German legal terminology, the term “justifying defensive (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 75