Titlebook: Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice; Psychological Perspe Peter J. Koppen,Steven D. Penrod Book 2003 Springer Science+Business Media N

Gratification

书目名称Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice影响因子(影响力)




书目名称Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice影响因子(影响力)学科排名




书目名称Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice网络公开度




书目名称Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice网络公开度学科排名




书目名称Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice被引频次




书目名称Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice被引频次学科排名




书目名称Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice年度引用




书目名称Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice年度引用学科排名




书目名称Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice读者反馈




书目名称Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice读者反馈学科排名

RACE

独裁政府

Convergent Systems: Analysis and Synthesis,coes that some authors have thought to be typical for group decisions like those made by jurors. Again, there is no convincing support for the idea that group decisions are necessarily more risky than those made by a single individual (e.g., Aldag & Riggs Fuller, 1993). Apart from that it is of cour

Capitulate

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39135-9in and again cases of mistaken identification (Clifford & Bull, 1978; Loftus, 1979; Meurer, Sporer, & Rennig, 1990; Shepherd, Ellis, & Davies, 1982; Yarmey, 1979). Most recently, Scheck, Neufeld, and Dwyer (2001), in their book ., reported that, in the year 200, the Innocence Project had reconstruct

Addictive

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39135-9to experts on experts and their role in accusatorial systems on the one hand, and inquisitorial systems on the other. The list of experts is impressive, and so is their standing within their community. The clients—the inquisitorial and adversarial systems—have eloquent representation and advantageou

恶意

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9534-7hes of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (Article 2 of the Statute), violations of the laws and customs of war (Article 3), genocide (Article 4), and crimes against humanity (Article 5). Sentencing those responsible would contribute to ensuring that these atrocities are halted, and that justice would b

Spinal-Tap

,Introduction to Complex System Resilience, ceiling on jury awards (e.g., ., 1991). Some of the proposed changes in the jury system have been stimulated by particular high profile trials (e.g., the acquittal of white police officers on trial for the beating of African-American Rodney King, St. George, 1993), such as calls for racial quotas t

ASSAY

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-3053-1 the public to be able to review the adjudication of cases by the judiciary, at trial or through the news-media. In order to bridge the gap between the adjudicators and the general public, courts should be open to anyone who wishes to attend.

abject

NAG

Taking Recovered Memories to Court,coes that some authors have thought to be typical for group decisions like those made by jurors. Again, there is no convincing support for the idea that group decisions are necessarily more risky than those made by a single individual (e.g., Aldag & Riggs Fuller, 1993). Apart from that it is of cour