Law Commons^™

Socialist Republic Of Vietnam V. Pham Thi Doan Trang, David Mccraw, Human Rights Institute

Human Rights Institute

On the night of October 6, 2020, at the conclusion of a virtual human rights meeting between the governments of the United States of America and Vietnam, Vietnamese police arrested the journalist and human rights activist Pham Thi Doan Trang at her home in Hanoi. Ms. Trang was arrested and detained for allegedly “conducting propaganda against the Socialist Republic of Vietnam” and “making, storing, spreading information, materials, items for the purpose of opposing the State of Socialist Republic of Vietnam” — two of the most notorious of Vietnam’s fifteen national security offenses.

It would be a full year — during …

Thailand V. Does 1-5 Of The Organization For Thai Federation, Human Rights Institute, Demetra Sorvatzioti

Human Rights Institute

From November 2019 to January 2020, the Human Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School monitored the trial of five individuals on charges of sedition and membership in a secret society, the latter predicated on the defendants’ alleged affiliation with the Organization for Thai Federation (OTF), an organization whose political platform includes changing the existing political system from a constitutional monarchy to republicanism. Specifically, the defendants were accused of a range of nonviolent activities in support of OTF, from distributing flyers and t-shirts to communicating with other supporters of OTF — all activities protected by their right to freedom of expression …

Trial Monitoring Of People V. Miti Et Al. (Zambia 2018), Human Rights Institute, Beth Van Schaack

Human Rights Institute

Between September and December 2018, TrialWatch monitored the trial of six
activists in Zambia, who were arrested and charged under the Public Order Act in
connection with an anti-corruption protest they organized in 2017. On December 21, 2018, the judge dismissed the charges and acquitted all six defendants.

Although the trial itself was generally fair, and Judge Mwaka Chigali Mikalile is to be commended in this regard, the proceedings were infected with prosecutorial misconduct in pursuing spurious charges based upon patently insufficient evidence.

Trial Monitoring Of People V. Cansu Pişkin (Turkey 2019), Human Rights Institute, Stephen J. Rapp

Human Rights Institute

Between March and May 2019, TrialWatch monitors under the supervision of the
Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic monitored the trial of Cansu Pişkin, a
journalist for the Turkish daily paper, Evrensel, in Istanbul, Turkey. Pişkin was charged with “making a public servant into a target for terrorist organizations” in violation of Section 6(1) of Law No. 3713, otherwise known as the Anti-Terror Law, for publishing the prosecutor’s name in her April 5, 2018 article, “Special Prosecutor for the Bosphorus Students.” On May 7, 2019, the Court convicted Pişkin and sentenced her to 10 months’ imprisonment (with the sentence pronouncement …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Darryl K. Brown, Robert P. Burns, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar, Jessica L. West

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Brief For Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Robert P. Burns, Sherman J. Clark, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Subverting Brady V. Maryland And Denying A Fair Trial: Studying The Schuelke Report, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The Schuelke Report about the ill-fated federal prosecution of the late-Senator Ted Stevens is an extraordinary contribution to criminal procedure. No other official documentation or investigative study of a criminal prosecution to my knowledge has dissected and analyzed as carefully and thoroughly the sordid and clandestine actions of a team of prosecutors who zealously wanted to win a criminal conviction at all costs. In examining this Report, one gets the feeling that as the investigation and prosecution of Senator Stevens unfolded, and the prosecution’s theory of guilt unraveled, the prosecutors became indifferent whether the defendant was really guilty; they just …

Reconsidering Trials In Absentia At The Special Tribunal For Lebanon: An Application Of The Tribunal's Early Jurisprudence, Maggie Gardner

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Since Nuremburg, no individual has been prosecuted in an international or internationalized court entirely in his or her absence. That may soon change. The Special Tribunal for Lebanon, which is empowered to try defendants in absentia, has now confirmed its first indictment. While its trial in absentia procedures were met with concern and criticism from some quarters when they were first announced, reconsideration is warranted in light of subsequent judicial developments. The judges of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon have now established in their preliminary decisions an interpretive approach to the Tribunal’s Statute that is adamantly purposive. This purposive approach …

Brady-Based Prosecutorial Misconduct Claims, Buckley, And The Arkansas Coram Nobis Remedy, J. Thomas Sullivan

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Canadian Criminal Jury, Neil Vidmar, Regina Schuller

Faculty Scholarship

The Canadian criminal jury system has some unique characteristics. In contrast to American law, that gives precedent to free speech over fair trial, and English law, that favors fair trial over free speech, Canadian law occupies a middle ground balancing these competing values .Jury selection procedure in most trials is similar to that of England: jurors are assumed to be “impartial between the Queen and the accused” and are selected without a voir dire. However, in cases involving exceptional pretrial publicity or involving accused persons from racial or ethnic minority groups, jurors are vetted by a “challenge for cause” process …

Coming Soon To A Court Near You – Convicting The Unrepresented At The Bail Stage: An Autopsy Of A State High Court’S Sua Sponte Rejection Of Indigent Defendants’ Right To Counsel, Douglas L. Colbert

Faculty Scholarship

Recently, the Maryland Court of Appeals became the first state court of last resort to reject Gideon v. Wainwright’s guarantee of counsel at the bail stage. In ruling sua sponte that bail is not a critical stage entitling indigent defendants to invoke their constitutional right to counsel, the Fenner Court held that statements offered by an unrepresented and non-Mirandized indigent defendant were admissible at trial. I contend that the Fenner ruling may transform the pretrial fact-gathering process by providing prosecutors with an additional source of evidence against indigent defendants, namely statements made at a judicial proceeding for the purpose …

Trust Me, I’M A Judge: Why Binding Judicial Notice Of Jurisdictional Facts Violates The Right To Jury Trial, William M. Carter Jr.

Articles

The conventional model of criminal trials holds that the prosecution is required to prove every element of the offense beyond the jury's reasonable doubt. The American criminal justice system is premised on the right of the accused to have all facts relevant to his guilt or innocence decided by a jury of his peers. The role of the judge is seen as limited to deciding issues of law and facilitating the jury's fact-finding. Despite these principles,judges are reluctant to submit to the jury elements of the offense that the judge perceives to be . routine, uncontroversial or uncontested.

One such …

Discovering Who We Are: An English Perspective On The Simpson Trial, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.