No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis sets out to provide a deep analysis of the mechanisms for review of convictions in New Zealand and England after initial appeal rights are exhausted, and to identify the key areas of similarity and difference between these systems, the reasons for these differences, and their implications. The appeal systems in each jurisdiction are briefly examined, alongside the pressures and restrictions on their functioning. Particular attention is paid to the options for appeal out of time, and for revisiting appeal decisions if new material comes to light. The main discussion is of the specialist procedures for review of suspect convictions in each jurisdiction: the Royal Prerogative of Mercy process carried out by the New Zealand Ministry of Justice and the work of the English Criminal Cases Review Commission. This discussion presents the results of empirical research carried out by the author utilising the files of each of these bodies. It investigates the legal context in which each body functions, and provides an account of how each body functions in practice, by examining the circumstances in which each body will contemplate referring a matter back to an appeal court and the means by which a determination is made as to whether to do so in an individual case. In addition it examines the various factors (legal and non-legal) which impact on their work. Finally, the key features of the two systems are contrasted, with a discussion of the areas of similarity and difference, as well as the possible implications of these, in particular for reform of the New Zealand processes.

"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maîtrise en droit (LL.M.)" / L'étude de notre common Law révèle que les tribunaux canadiens et anglais ont constamment été appelés à décider de l'admissibilité d'éléments de preuve impliquant la participation de l'accusé à la détermination de sa culpabilité. Qu'il s'agisse des confessions obtenues auprès d'un suspect lors de l'interrogatoire policier, ou du témoignage rendu par un accusé dans le cours du processus judiciaire (par exemple lors du procès d'un complice ou d'un premier procès dont le verdict a été annulé par la cour d'appel), on constate que l'État a régulièrement tenté de prouver la culpabilité d'un accusé par le biais de ses propres aveux. On tente généralement de justifier le recours à cette méthode d'obtention de la preuve en invoquant que les aveux faits par un accusé sont de loin la meilleure preuve de sa culpabilité et donc, qu'ils aident le juge des faits à découvrir la vérité. Il appert toutefois qu'au fil des années, l'État a souvent abusé de ce pouvoir et que des condamnations ainsi obtenues l'ont parfois été au mépris des droits des accusés, notamment le droit à un procès juste et équitable et le droit encore plus fondamental de ne pas être contraint à fournir contre sa volonté une preuve de nature à établir sa culpabilité dans son propre procès. De plus, les nombreuses erreurs judiciaires mises à jour au cours de dernières années au Canada démontrent clairement que des verdicts de culpabilité ont aussi été erronément prononcés contre des accusés sur la foi de confessions qui se sont révélées plus tard être fausses. Pour cette raison, il apparaît important de déterminer si ce moyen de preuve est toujours légitime aujourd'hui, en regard de deux des grandes théories du droit pénal: la «théorie de la gestion des risques» et la «théorie de la justice» ou de l'équité du procès. De façon plus générale, cette étude cherche à répondre à la question suivante: en droit criminel canadien, la fin (recherche de la Vérité) justifie-t-elle tous les moyens employés pour la découvrir? / The study of our "common Law" reveals that the Canadian and English courts were constantly called upon in order to decide on the admissibility of elements of proof involving the participation of the defendant in the assertion of his guilt. Whether it is confessions obtained from a suspect during a police interrogation, or the testimony given by a defendant during the course ofthe legal process (for example, at the time of a trial of an accomplice or a first trial for which the verdict was cancelled by a court of appeal), we notice that the State regularly tried to prove the guilt of a defendant by way of his own statements. We generally try to justify the recourse to this method of obtaining proof by invoking that the statements made by a defendant are by far the best proof of his guilt and thus help the judge to uncover the truth. It appears, however, that over the years the State often abused this power and that ensuing convictions were sometimes obtained with a disregard of the rights of the defendants; in particular, the right to a fair trial and the right even more fundamental not to be constrained to provide against his will, a proof likely to establish his guilt in his own trial. In addition, many legal updates in the recent years in Canada c1early show that verdicts of guilt were also incorrectly pronounced against defendants on the faith of confessions which were later proved to he false. As such, it appears important to determine ifthis type ofproofretains its legitimacy today in regards to two of the great theories of criminallaw: the "Theory of Risk Management" and the "Theory of Justice" or the equity of the trial. More generally, this study seeks to answer the following question: "In Canadian criminallaw, does the end (search for the truth) justify the means used to uncover it?"

With criminal cases continuing to be exonerated across the United States, research must be done on the subject to advance current practices to reduce its occurrence in the future. This study combines county population data with the National Registry of Exonerations to analyze the contributing factors to wrongful convictions and the possible effect of population on their frequency. The objective of this study was to identify specific policy changes based on the five contributing factors to wrongful convictions that could be applied to population specific areas. The results yielded multiple patterns that are discussed thoroughly. These findings allowed the introduction of policy changes and proposals for future research.

Duty of members of elected bodies and other persons to prevent threatened insolvency of business corporation and consequences of breach of the duty Abstract This diploma thesis deals with the area of civil, commercial and insolvency law. It focuses in particular on the duty of directors of a business corporation and other persons to prevent threatened insolvency with emphasis on the legal regulation of the consequences of breach of such duty. This diploma thesis is divided into four main chapters, where the most important one is the second chapter. The chapters in the diploma thesis flow continuously and logically which facilitates the reader's orientation in the subject. The first chapter defines the basic terms related to the discussed topic which are subsequently used throughout the diploma thesis. Emphasis is placed on the duty of care, whose breach is a prerequisite for the application of the sanctions described in the second chapter. The second chapter deals with the consequences of the breach of the duty to prevent threatened insolvency. The consequences are analysed in detail and the issues over which the legal consensus is missing are set out in the analysis. Different views on these uncertain points in the legislation are set out, and the thesis takes a critical approach in this matter and...

Our criminal justice system works very hard to prevent criminals from harming other individuals; however, unfortunately mistakes happen. One wrongful conviction is one too many. There are multiple factors that can be assumed to be the cause of wrongful convictions. However, due to the lack of directly related research, the determents are not well established. The following research addresses wrongful convictions as a result of public defender representation. Through the process of theory construction, the research uses critical race theory and social disorganization theory to show the relationship between court appointed representation and wrongful convictions. A new theory is also established that is referred to as the partial load reduction theory. This theory establishes the relationship that exists between wrongful convictions and public defender representation and provides solutions as well as new avenues for future research.

L'étude de notre common Law révèle que les tribunaux canadiens et anglais ont constamment été appelés à décider de l'admissibilité d'éléments de preuve impliquant la participation de l'accusé à la détermination de sa culpabilité. Qu'il s'agisse des confessions obtenues auprès d'un suspect lors de l'interrogatoire policier, ou du témoignage rendu par un accusé dans le cours du processus judiciaire (par exemple lors du procès d'un complice ou d'un premier procès dont le verdict a été annulé par la cour d'appel), on constate que l'État a régulièrement tenté de prouver la culpabilité d'un accusé par le biais de ses propres aveux. On tente généralement de justifier le recours à cette méthode d'obtention de la preuve en invoquant que les aveux faits par un accusé sont de loin la meilleure preuve de sa culpabilité et donc, qu'ils aident le juge des faits à découvrir la vérité. Il appert toutefois qu'au fil des années, l'État a souvent abusé de ce pouvoir et que des condamnations ainsi obtenues l'ont parfois été au mépris des droits des accusés, notamment le droit à un procès juste et équitable et le droit encore plus fondamental de ne pas être contraint à fournir contre sa volonté une preuve de nature à établir sa culpabilité dans son propre procès. De plus, les nombreuses erreurs judiciaires mises à jour au cours de dernières années au Canada démontrent clairement que des verdicts de culpabilité ont aussi été erronément prononcés contre des accusés sur la foi de confessions qui se sont révélées plus tard être fausses. Pour cette raison, il apparaît important de déterminer si ce moyen de preuve est toujours légitime aujourd'hui, en regard de deux des grandes théories du droit pénal: la «théorie de la gestion des risques» et la «théorie de la justice» ou de l'équité du procès. De façon plus générale, cette étude cherche à répondre à la question suivante: en droit criminel canadien, la fin (recherche de la Vérité) justifie-t-elle tous les moyens employés pour la découvrir? / The study of our "common Law" reveals that the Canadian and English courts were constantly called upon in order to decide on the admissibility of elements of proof involving the participation of the defendant in the assertion of his guilt. Whether it is confessions obtained from a suspect during a police interrogation, or the testimony given by a defendant during the course ofthe legal process (for example, at the time of a trial of an accomplice or a first trial for which the verdict was cancelled by a court of appeal), we notice that the State regularly tried to prove the guilt of a defendant by way of his own statements. We generally try to justify the recourse to this method of obtaining proof by invoking that the statements made by a defendant are by far the best proof of his guilt and thus help the judge to uncover the truth. It appears, however, that over the years the State often abused this power and that ensuing convictions were sometimes obtained with a disregard of the rights of the defendants; in particular, the right to a fair trial and the right even more fundamental not to be constrained to provide against his will, a proof likely to establish his guilt in his own trial. In addition, many legal updates in the recent years in Canada c1early show that verdicts of guilt were also incorrectly pronounced against defendants on the faith of confessions which were later proved to he false. As such, it appears important to determine ifthis type ofproofretains its legitimacy today in regards to two of the great theories of criminallaw: the "Theory of Risk Management" and the "Theory of Justice" or the equity of the trial. More generally, this study seeks to answer the following question: "In Canadian criminallaw, does the end (search for the truth) justify the means used to uncover it?" / "Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maîtrise en droit (LL.M.)"

Univ., Diss.--Freiburg (Breisgau), 1996.