Law Commons^™

Beyond Candor, Scott Altman

Michigan Law Review

In Part I, I consider whether judges might hold inaccurate beliefs that make them more candid and constrained. I suggest that even if theories of neutral decisionmaking are incomplete and inaccurate, a legal system in which judges hold these beliefs about their own behavior could have advantages. If many judges believe that they can, should, and do decide almost all cases by following the law, they might behave differently than they would if they held more accurate beliefs. They might behave so as to facilitate repression and denial, because their self-esteem depends on maintaining the belief that they decide as …

A Modest Proposal: A Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege For West Virginia, Franklin D. Cleckley

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Hating Criminals: How Can Something That Feels So Good Be Wrong?, Joshua Dressler

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Forgiveness and Mercy by Jeffrie G. Murphy and Jean Hampton

Crimes Of Obedience: Toward Social Psychology Of Authority And Responsibility, Michael Kenneth Isenman

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Crimes of Obedience: Toward Social Psychology of Authority and Responsibility by Herbert C. Kelman and V. Lee Hamilton

Of Literature, Politics, And Crime, Francis A. Allen

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Seductions of Crime: Moral and Sensual Attractions in Doing Evil

The Child Sexual Abuse Literature: A Call For Greater Objectivity, John E.B. Myers

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Accusations of Child Sexual Abuse by Hollida Wakefield and Ralph Underwager., The Battle and the Backlash: The Child Sexual Abuse War by David Hechler., On Trial: America's Courts and Their Treatment of Sexually Abused Children by Billie Wright Dziech and Chales B. Schudson.

Feminism And Post-Structuralism, Joan C. Williams

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Female Body and the Law by Zillah R. Eisenstein

Some Implications Of Cognitive Psychology For Risk Regulation, Roger G. Noll, James E. Krier

Articles

Beginning with a set of books and articles published in the 1950s, cognitive psychologists have developed a new descriptive theory of how people make decisions under conditions of risk and uncertainty. A dominant theme in the theory is that most people do not evaluate risky circumstances in the manner assumed by conventional decision theory-they do not, that is, seek to maximize the expected value of some function when selecting among actions with uncertain outcomes. The purpose of this article is to consider some implications of the cognitive theory for regulatory policies designed to control risks to life, health, and the …

Psychodynamics And The Insanity Defense: Ordinary Common Sense And Heuristic Reasoning, Michael L. Perlin

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Attitudes Toward Corporate Responsibility: A Psycholegal Perspective, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

One of the most striking phenomena in the contemporary legal world is the shift toward holding businesses and corporations responsible for harm. Legal theorists and historians maintain that today business corporations are expected to provide compensation for injuries that in earlier times would have been attributed to individuals or to fate. Furthermore, criminal charges against businesses and business executives are becoming commonplace.

Despite a good deal of legal scholarship on the shift toward holding businesses culpable for harms, psychologists have conducted little systematic research on public views of corporate responsibility. How do people conceptualize the civil liability or criminal responsibility …

Unpacking The Myths: The Symbolism Mythology Of Insanity Defense Jurisprudence, Michael L. Perlin

Articles & Chapters

The insanity defense has been the subject of great controversy. A review of the jurisprudential debate, infamous cases, judicial and legislative decision-making, media coverage, as well as public attitudes, when read in light of scientific and empirical research, reveals a gaping disparity between what we know and how we think about the mentally ill and the insanity defense. The Author argues that this disparity is the result of several operational myths about the mentally ill and the insanity defense. In this Article, the Author focuses on the role of psychiatry, psychology, and mental illness in the law, specifically addressing how …

Aids-Related Dementia And Competency To Stand Trial: A Potential Abuse Of The Forensic Mental Health System?, Michael L. Perlin, Joel Dvoskin

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Are Courts Competent To Decide Competency Questions? Stripping The Facade From United States V. Charters, Michael L. Perlin

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.