Spelling suggestions: "subject:"discretization to excluded evidence""
1 |
The derivative imperative : how should Australian criminal trial courts treat evidence deriving from illegally or improperly obtained evidence?Mellifont, Kerri Anne January 2007 (has links)
How should Australian criminal trial courts treat evidence deriving from illegally or improperly obtained evidence? The fact that derivative evidence gives rise to factors distinct from primary evidence makes it deserving of an examination of its peculiarities. In doing so, the assumption may be put aside that derivative evidence falls wholly within the established general discourse of illegally or improperly obtained evidence. Just as the judicial response to primary evidence must be intellectually rigorous, disciplined and principled, so must be the response to derivative evidence. As such, a principled analysis of how Australian courts should approach derivative evidence can significantly contribute to the discourse on the law with respect to the exclusion of illegally or improperly obtained evidence. This thesis provides that principled analysis by arguing that the principles which underpin and inform the discretionary exclusionary frameworks within Australia require an approach which is consistent as between illegally obtained derivative evidence and illegally obtained primary evidence.
|
2 |
刑事裁判所の証拠採否裁量を規律する準則 : 「証拠の厳選」論に対する批判的考察 / Standard of Limiting Criminal-trial-judge's Discretion to Exclude Relevant Evidence : Critical Inquiry on the Idea of "Strict Screening of Admissibility of Relevant Evidence" / ケイジ サイバンショ ノ ショウコ サイヒ サイリョウ オ キリツスル ジュンソク : ショウコ ノ ゲンセンロン ニタイスル ヒハンテキ コウサツ角田, 雄彦, Kakuta, Yuhiko 24 July 2009 (has links)
博士(法学) / 甲第520号 / x, vi, 227p / Hitotsubashi University(一橋大学)
|
Page generated in 0.7988 seconds