No description available.

O presente trabalho, mediante a adoção de um modelo objetivo de direito probatório, pretendeu sistematizar os conhecimentos atuais sobre prova testemunhal no direito e, em seguida, submetê-los ao crivo da ciência, notadamente da epistemologia e da psicologia. Assim sendo, apresentam-se, na segunda parte, as premissas do novo direito probatório, demonstrando que o presente trabalho somente tem sentido mediante a adoção de um modelo objetivo de direito probatório, pois somente esse preocupa-se com a qualidade epistêmica da busca da verdade procedida em um processo concreto. Na terceira parte, procede-se com uma ampla pesquisa no direito, incluindo doutrina e jurisprudência de países de civil law, a fim de que se verifique o estado atual da arte a respeito da prova testemunhal no direito, como ela é praticada hoje. Na quarta parte, apresentam-se as principais correntes a respeito da epistemologia do testemunho, notadamente o presuntivismo e o não presuntivismo, a fim de verificar qual das correntes é praticada no direito e qual, na opinião do autor, deveria ser. Na quinta parte, utilizando-se metodologia científica das áreas da saúde, apresentam-se as principais conclusões atuais da psicologia do testemunho, a fim de que se verifiquem quais são as suas fragilidades e quais são os pontos que devem merecer atenção em sua prática. Na sexta parte, utilizando-se os conhecimentos abordados nas quarta e quinta partes, avaliam-se as premissas demonstradas na terceira parte, a fim de que se proponha uma reconstrução da prova testemunhal no direito consentânea com o modelo objetivo de direito probatório e, principalmente, com os conhecimentos mais atuais da ciência. / The present thesis, by adopting an objetive model of evidence law, intends to summarize the current knowledge about witness testimony in law and, in what follows, evaluate it using the science, mainly the epistemology and the psychology. For doing so, it begins, on the second part, with the premises of the new way of working with evidence, showing that the present work has a purpose only by adopting an objetive model of working with evidence, once that only by doing so the proceedings are worried about the epistemic quality of the search for the truth done in a concrete procedure. On the third part, the aim is to proceed with a wide investigation in law, including jurisprudence and precedents of the civil law courts, analysing the current knowledge about witness testimony, in the way its practiced today. On the fourth part, the two main lines of thought on epistemology of testimony, presuntivism and no-presuntivism, are presented, being analysed which one is usually adopted by civil law systems and which one should be, in the author's opinion. On the fifth part, using scientific methodology of the health field, the work presents the main current conclusions of the psychology of testimony, in order to verify what are the fragilities and the points that need attention in the practice of witness testimony. On the sixth part, using the knowledge presented on the fourth and fifth parts, the premises presented on the third part are evaluated, with the purpose of proposing a reconstruction of the witness testimony in law using the objective model of evidence and, mainly, the current knowledge in science.

O presente trabalho, mediante a adoção de um modelo objetivo de direito probatório, pretendeu sistematizar os conhecimentos atuais sobre prova testemunhal no direito e, em seguida, submetê-los ao crivo da ciência, notadamente da epistemologia e da psicologia. Assim sendo, apresentam-se, na segunda parte, as premissas do novo direito probatório, demonstrando que o presente trabalho somente tem sentido mediante a adoção de um modelo objetivo de direito probatório, pois somente esse preocupa-se com a qualidade epistêmica da busca da verdade procedida em um processo concreto. Na terceira parte, procede-se com uma ampla pesquisa no direito, incluindo doutrina e jurisprudência de países de civil law, a fim de que se verifique o estado atual da arte a respeito da prova testemunhal no direito, como ela é praticada hoje. Na quarta parte, apresentam-se as principais correntes a respeito da epistemologia do testemunho, notadamente o presuntivismo e o não presuntivismo, a fim de verificar qual das correntes é praticada no direito e qual, na opinião do autor, deveria ser. Na quinta parte, utilizando-se metodologia científica das áreas da saúde, apresentam-se as principais conclusões atuais da psicologia do testemunho, a fim de que se verifiquem quais são as suas fragilidades e quais são os pontos que devem merecer atenção em sua prática. Na sexta parte, utilizando-se os conhecimentos abordados nas quarta e quinta partes, avaliam-se as premissas demonstradas na terceira parte, a fim de que se proponha uma reconstrução da prova testemunhal no direito consentânea com o modelo objetivo de direito probatório e, principalmente, com os conhecimentos mais atuais da ciência. / The present thesis, by adopting an objetive model of evidence law, intends to summarize the current knowledge about witness testimony in law and, in what follows, evaluate it using the science, mainly the epistemology and the psychology. For doing so, it begins, on the second part, with the premises of the new way of working with evidence, showing that the present work has a purpose only by adopting an objetive model of working with evidence, once that only by doing so the proceedings are worried about the epistemic quality of the search for the truth done in a concrete procedure. On the third part, the aim is to proceed with a wide investigation in law, including jurisprudence and precedents of the civil law courts, analysing the current knowledge about witness testimony, in the way its practiced today. On the fourth part, the two main lines of thought on epistemology of testimony, presuntivism and no-presuntivism, are presented, being analysed which one is usually adopted by civil law systems and which one should be, in the author's opinion. On the fifth part, using scientific methodology of the health field, the work presents the main current conclusions of the psychology of testimony, in order to verify what are the fragilities and the points that need attention in the practice of witness testimony. On the sixth part, using the knowledge presented on the fourth and fifth parts, the premises presented on the third part are evaluated, with the purpose of proposing a reconstruction of the witness testimony in law using the objective model of evidence and, mainly, the current knowledge in science.

O presente trabalho, mediante a adoção de um modelo objetivo de direito probatório, pretendeu sistematizar os conhecimentos atuais sobre prova testemunhal no direito e, em seguida, submetê-los ao crivo da ciência, notadamente da epistemologia e da psicologia. Assim sendo, apresentam-se, na segunda parte, as premissas do novo direito probatório, demonstrando que o presente trabalho somente tem sentido mediante a adoção de um modelo objetivo de direito probatório, pois somente esse preocupa-se com a qualidade epistêmica da busca da verdade procedida em um processo concreto. Na terceira parte, procede-se com uma ampla pesquisa no direito, incluindo doutrina e jurisprudência de países de civil law, a fim de que se verifique o estado atual da arte a respeito da prova testemunhal no direito, como ela é praticada hoje. Na quarta parte, apresentam-se as principais correntes a respeito da epistemologia do testemunho, notadamente o presuntivismo e o não presuntivismo, a fim de verificar qual das correntes é praticada no direito e qual, na opinião do autor, deveria ser. Na quinta parte, utilizando-se metodologia científica das áreas da saúde, apresentam-se as principais conclusões atuais da psicologia do testemunho, a fim de que se verifiquem quais são as suas fragilidades e quais são os pontos que devem merecer atenção em sua prática. Na sexta parte, utilizando-se os conhecimentos abordados nas quarta e quinta partes, avaliam-se as premissas demonstradas na terceira parte, a fim de que se proponha uma reconstrução da prova testemunhal no direito consentânea com o modelo objetivo de direito probatório e, principalmente, com os conhecimentos mais atuais da ciência. / The present thesis, by adopting an objetive model of evidence law, intends to summarize the current knowledge about witness testimony in law and, in what follows, evaluate it using the science, mainly the epistemology and the psychology. For doing so, it begins, on the second part, with the premises of the new way of working with evidence, showing that the present work has a purpose only by adopting an objetive model of working with evidence, once that only by doing so the proceedings are worried about the epistemic quality of the search for the truth done in a concrete procedure. On the third part, the aim is to proceed with a wide investigation in law, including jurisprudence and precedents of the civil law courts, analysing the current knowledge about witness testimony, in the way its practiced today. On the fourth part, the two main lines of thought on epistemology of testimony, presuntivism and no-presuntivism, are presented, being analysed which one is usually adopted by civil law systems and which one should be, in the author's opinion. On the fifth part, using scientific methodology of the health field, the work presents the main current conclusions of the psychology of testimony, in order to verify what are the fragilities and the points that need attention in the practice of witness testimony. On the sixth part, using the knowledge presented on the fourth and fifth parts, the premises presented on the third part are evaluated, with the purpose of proposing a reconstruction of the witness testimony in law using the objective model of evidence and, mainly, the current knowledge in science.

Thesis advisor: Paul S. Gray / Can a vivid presentation about a tragic chapter of history elicit in viewers an empathetic reaction, as well as evidence of the telescopic perspective Mills[1] ([1959] 2000) described as the "sociological imagination"? Does the addition of victims' voices make a noticeable difference in their response to the historical event, as well contemporary controversies? Some scholars propose that oral histories, especially witness testimonies, have the potential to reach audiences more deeply than facts alone. "Narratives," as K. Slobin observed, "unfold with flesh and blood...encouraging empathy, identification and a humanization of content" (in Bochner and Ellis, 1992:171).[2] But, little systematic research has examined how or to what extent personal testimony may encourage empathetic understanding and a broader, more nuanced understanding of social problems. In an era where entertainment content skews toward "reality" programming and technology supersedes face-to-face interactions, the challenge to pierce cultural white noise is great. Educators, then, must figure out ways to counteract the desensitization, apathy and cynicism that follow these trends--but in ways that are proven, effective and lasting. My research sought to discover if victim narratives help students connect intellectually and emotionally with lessons about social justice. Thirteen undergraduate classes were exposed to three variations of a fact-based, multimedia presentation about Japanese internment in America during WWII. Each presentation included the same photographs, newsreel, and factual information. Presentations varied, however, in their use of survivor testimony and in the manner of its incorporation (video versus written accounts). Two groups of the sample were exposed to survivors describing their experiences in the internment camps. All groups completed surveys, and 21 participants gave extensive interviews. Data analysis examined information recall, sociological perspective, emotional response, empathetic identification and predictions of future behavior. The experiment generated much-needed empirical data on the efficacy of testimony and its ability to shape attitudes, broaden world view, and possibly influence behavior. These findings will assist educators in anticipating outcomes associated with various heuristic strategies, especially those including witness testimonies. [1] Mills, C. Wright. 1959. The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford, 2000. [2] Bochner, Arthur P. and Caroyln Ellis. 1992. "Personal Narrative as a Social Approach to Interpersonal Communication." Communication Theory 2(2)165-172. Comment from K. Slobin is listed as a personal communication with the authors in February 1991. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2012. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Sociology.

The media exaggerates the capabilities of crime laboratories while it publicizes the wrongdoings of individual forensic scientists. Such portrayals skew the perspectives of jurors and hinder expert witness testimony. Complicating the problem are separate, but related, phenomena that influence how forensic laboratories conduct casework. These phenomena are Cole and Dioso-Villa's conceptualization of the unrealistic expectations of forensic science created by fictional television, known as the CSI Effect; the Daubert ruling on the admissibility of expert testimony; and some federal policy changes as a result of a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report that impacted requirements for the daily operation of crime laboratories. This study sought to better understand which among these phenomena had the greatest effect on policy development and implementation related to crime lab operations. Quantitative survey data were collected through an online survey from a nationwide sample (n = 124) of forensic practitioners belonging to the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors. The data were analyzed using ANOVA to evaluate the influence of each factor (CSI Effect, Daubert ruling, and NAS report) on policy creation within crime laboratories. Results indicate that the CSI Effect has a statistically greater impact on policy creation than did either the Daubert ruling or the NAS report (p <.001). The implications for positive social change stemming from this study include recommendations to lawmakers and administrators to reevaluate performance objectives related to operations and increase awareness of the CSI Effect in order to promote scientifically sound results and increase the effectiveness of testimony at trial.

RÉSUMÉ IN ENGLISH The topic of this master thesis is the principle of promptness in the criminal proceedings because this question is nowadays the subject-matter of numerous discussions, in which it is spoken about overloaded Czech justice system, about delays in court proceedings and about options, how to relieve the system of Czech criminal justice system. The aim of the submitted thesis is to evaluate critically the current legal institutes helping to make the criminal proceedings faster, mainly the investigation of crimes, and to contemplate its potential extension, without having caused any more significant limitation of the right of the accused to defence. Among other principles, which stay often contrary to the principle of promptness and which the legislators always must bear in mind, are the principle of material truth and the principle of contradiction. The thesis is divided into seven basic chapters. The first chapter is the introduction. The second chapter deals with the meaning of promptness of criminal proceedings for each particular subject of the criminal proceedings, mainly for the accused and the injured party. Third chapter presents the statistic data on the average length of proceedings in the Czech Republic and within the European Union: the average length of criminal proceedings leaded...

Brigham and Bothwell (1983) claimed that jurors have a scientifically incorrect view of eyewitness testimony. The purpose of this study was to examine the most beneficial way to assist the jury in dealing with eyewitness testimony. Duckworth, Kreiner, Stark-Wroblewski, and Marsh (2011) applied interactive participation in an eyewitness activity and expert testimony to a mock-jury dealing with eyewitness testimony and found that those who participated in the activity had significantly fewer convictions. The methodological framework of the Duckworth et al. study was applied to East Tennessee State University criminal justice undergraduates. Although this study did not find any significant effects in hearing expert testimony on empirical findings regarding eyewitness testimony or participating in an individual recall activity, cross tabulation frequencies indicated a directional pattern of relationship when independent variables were compared to the control group.

No description available.