Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
We Don’T Want To Hear It: Psychology, Literature And The Narrative Model Of Judging, Kenworthey Bilz
We Don’T Want To Hear It: Psychology, Literature And The Narrative Model Of Judging, Kenworthey Bilz
Kenworthey Bilz
The “narrative” model of legal judging argues that legal decision makers both do and should render judgments by assembling sensible sto-ries out of evidence (as opposed to using Bayesian-type, linear models). This model is usually understood to demand that before one may judge a situation, one must give the parties the opportunity to tell their story in a manner that invites, or at least allows, empathy from the judger. This Article refers to this as the “inclusionary approach” to the narrative model of judging. Using psychological research in emotions and perspective-taking and the more intuitive techniques of literary criticism, this …
Self-Incrimination Doctrine Is Dead; Long Live Self-Incrimination Doctrine: Confessions, Scientific Evidence, And The Anxieties Of The Liberal State, Kenworthey Bilz
Self-Incrimination Doctrine Is Dead; Long Live Self-Incrimination Doctrine: Confessions, Scientific Evidence, And The Anxieties Of The Liberal State, Kenworthey Bilz
Kenworthey Bilz
Confessions have historically been the most compelling evidence the state could offer at a criminal trial. However, improvements in forensic technologies have led to increased use of scientific evidence, such as DNA typing, pattern-recognition software, location tracking devices, and the like, with very impressive rates of reliability. The reliability of these methods has become so impressive, in fact, that it should lead to a reduced reliance on confessions (and other nonscientific evidence, such as eyewitness identifications) in criminal prosecutions. However, this does not mean that the doctrine of self-incrimination, which regulates the acquisition and use of confessions, will no longer …