Search results

Following in the footsteps of critics of the 1920s and 1930s, Caleb Foote's 1954 study of the bail system in Philadelphia set the agenda for bail reform in the United States focusing on judicial discretion and the inequities of a predominantly financially based pretrial detention system. This article argues that the bail reform movement originating in the 1960s fell short of its objectives in its failure to engage judges in the business of reform. From Foote's study on, Philadelphia has played a role historically in studies of bail, detention, and reform. The article considers the experience of Philadelphia's judicial pretrial release guidelines innovation from the 1980s to the present and its implications as an important contemporary bail reform strategy in addressing the problems of bail, release, and detention practices. The implications of the judge-centered pretrial release guidelines strategy for addressing pretrial release problems in urban state court systems are discussed in light of the original aims and issues of early bail reform.

The purpose of this paper is to draw to the attention of parliamentarians and policy-makers the specific vulnerabilities of applicants for bail that need to be addressed if there are to be any answers to the current malaise.

Almost a quarter of the adult prison population in Australia is made up of persons imprisoned awaiting trial. By looking at current data and recent research findings, the paper reveals that there persists in Australia great unevenness in remand distributions by jurisdiction.

The paper explains why there are differences in remand rates across Australia and why they are rising and draws from more recent snapshots that complement these findings from comprehensive studies conducted a decade ago.

Furthermore it examines ideas floated in the last decade by academics and practitioners keen to lower remand rates and to bring some uniformity to the process while keeping intact the two key (yet potentially contradictory) aims of the remand in custody system: the safety of the community and the presumption of innocence.

The paper’s findings will appeal to parliamentarians and policy-makers tasked with bringing about law reform in the field, as well as police leaders, correctional advisors and students of the legal process.

In this chapter, we provide a brief historical framework of the events and policy changes that impacted the prosecution of terrorism over the past 50 years with emphasis placed on the changes that resulted from the 9/11 attacks.

We provide a review of relevant literature and complete the chapter by providing new data (2015) on case outcomes derived from the American Terrorism Study, a database housed in the Terrorism Research Center in Fulbright College, at the University of Arkansas.

Investigative and prosecutorial authority in U.S. terrorism cases has experienced ebbs and flows that correspond with terrorism attacks as well as missteps by the FBI, and each has impacted the success of prosecution efforts. Despite dramatic changes, the number of cases prosecuted after 9/11 is unprecedented, and conviction rates continue to climb.

This chapter provides the reader with a synopsis of the policy changes that have occurred in federal terrorism investigations and trials from the late 1960s upto the present. Based on that context, we provide an explanation of how those policy changes have impacted terrorism prosecutions.

This article aims to advance a multifaceted framework for preserving algorithms and algorithmic systems in an archival context.

The article is based on a review and synthesis of existing literature, during which the authors observe emergent themes. After introducing these themes, the authors follow each theme as manifest in existing digital preservation projects, starting with algorithms' earliest conceptual starting points and moving up through themes' eventual implementation within a complex social environment.

The authors find current literature is largely divided between that which addresses algorithms primarily as computational artifacts and that which views them instead as primarily social in nature. To bridge this gap the authors propose that “the algorithm,” as the algorithm is frequently deployed in popular discourse, is best understood as not as either the algorithm's technical or social components, but rather the sum total of both.

The study is limited by its methodology as a literature review. However, the findings point toward a new framing for future research that is less divided in terms of social or material orientation.

Creating multifaceted records of algorithms, the authors argue, enables more effective regulation and management of algorithmic systems, which in turn help to improve their levels of fairness, accountability, and trustworthiness.

The paper offers a wide variety of case studies with the potential to inform future studies, while contextualizing the studies together within a new framework that avoids prior limitations.

Using socio-legal research on arrests and the criminal justice system, this paper contests the implicit argument in recent research on repression that arrests are “softer” than police violence. Specifically, the paper explores the physical conditions of arrest and detention, and the extent to which arrests initiate costly interactions with the legal system that punish defendants before they are even tried (or even if charges are later dropped). Using data on arrests and police practices from mine strikes in Arizona from the early 1980s and data on arrests and police practices during urban riots in the 1960s, the paper: (1) discusses the physical realities of arrest and detention; (2) outlines the array of costs that arrests impose on protesters; (3) discusses the implications of biased policing on that set of costs; and (4) examines the costs associated with mass arrests. The paper concludes this empirical analysis by questioning the commensurability of arrests with other forms of police action, including violence, against protesters.

Disabled people who are the end‐users (EU) of health services have a poor record of inclusion, yet a major stake in the quality of scientific research that informs the development of health knowledge and interventions. In traditional rehabilitation research it has been the researcher who sets the agenda, including determining the research question, study design and methods, and who controls dissemination of findings. This paper aims to describe the development of an EU research consultation committee and to describe the evaluation protocol used to assess the effectiveness of the committee.

The paper describes the context and development of an EU research consultation committee (the committee) to promote collaboration between researchers and lay‐EUs within a research organization in New Zealand. It also describes the qualitative evaluation protocol to be used to assess the effectiveness of the committee over the first 12 months of operation in order to refine its process and procedures.

The paper discusses the issues and challenges involved in achieving collaboration between researchers and EUs in the rehabilitation research space and describes this consultation model as a positive example of making inclusion a reality. Challenges include building research capacity within the EU community and development of real models of collaboration and partnership in rehabilitation research.

It is argued that the integrity and relevance of clinical research is enhanced by the involvement of EUs in all aspects of the research process.

Based upon recent statements made by the European Shadow Financial Regulatory Committee, a group of well-known professors coming from ten European countries, during the period 2012-2017, this paper aims to analyze from a European perspective the adequacy and credibility of the proposed framework.

This paper is a summary and interpretation of statements from the European Shadow Financial Regulatory Committee.

The authors argue that the credibility of the bail-in mechanism is likely to be limited. Because of this, unexpected losses may not be absorbed by unsecured debt holders. Therefore, there is still a need for relatively high equity capital buffers.

The issue of how to raise loss absorption capacity for banks is prominent on the international policy agenda. International regulators are aiming for a combination of equity capital, typically raised by issuing shares, retaining profits and issuing contingent convertible (CoCo) bonds and bail-in debt where unsecured creditors such as holders of subordinated and common bonds are supposed to take losses in case of a bankruptcy or restructuring of a bank.

This chapter provides a brief overview of community sanctions in Australia and examines the extent to which McNeill’s analysis in Pervasive Punishment (2019) is applicable in the Australian context. Two key issues in the Australian context are, firstly, state and territory-level variations within a federal political structure, and secondly, disproportionate Indigenous imprisonment and community sanction rates and the generally destructive impact of the criminal legal system on Indigenous communities and peoples. The chapter argues that developing a better agonistic politics around community sanctions requires descending from the broad level of historical and sociological analysis to examine state and territory-level variations in judicial and correctional structures, histories and cultures. Further, that Australian community sanctions cannot be understood without a primary focus on the differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous rates, experiences and meaning. The key to addressing the destructive impact of criminal legal processes and practices on Indigenous peoples lies in developing Indigenous governance, empowerment, self-determination, sovereignty and nation-building. Two recent developments promoting Indigenous governance are examined: the Uluru Statement from the Heart and Justice Reinvestment projects initiated by First Nations communities, highlighting the importance of activism, contest and struggle by community organisations.