Supremes Deny Rehearing in Child Rape Case
Handakte WebLAWg | 1. Oktober 2008 — This just in, from the hardworking Ben Winograd over at SCOTUS blog: The High Court has denied rehearing in Kennedy v. Louisi…
An article of 16 June 2008 by Tresa Baldas in the National Law Journal, Courts Putting Hot-Button Words on Ice, reports that words such as rape and victim are being banned by judges because they prejudice defendants. A steadily increasing number of courts across the United States are prohibiting witnesses and victims from uttering certain words in front of a jury, banning everything from the words "rape" to "victim" to "crime scene." Prosecutors and victims' rights advocates nationwide claim the courts are going too far in trying to cleanse witness testimony, all to protect a defendant's right to a fair trial. Concerns and fears over language restrictions have been percolating ever since judges in Nebraska and Missouri last year banned the word "rape" during rape trials. The article contains many examples. This relates largely to the Nebraska case reported in July 2007. From Slate: Nebraska law offers judges broad discretion to ban evidence or language that present the danger of "unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues or misleading the jury." And it's not unheard-of for judges to keep certain words out of a courtroom. Words like victim have been increasingly kept out of trials, since they tend to imply that a crime was committed. And as Safi's lawyer, Clarence Mock, explains, the word rape is just as loaded. "It's a legal conclusion for a witness to say, 'I was raped' or 'sexually assaulted.' … That's for a jury to decide." His concern is that the word rape so inflames jurors that they decide a case emotionally and not rationally. I think the judge may have gone too far in this particular case. In the NLJ article, note in particular the last section on the appeal against the Nebraska decision: Wendy J. Murphy of the New England School of Law, who is representing a Nebraska rape victim opposing the judge's barring of the word "rape," said the major battle facing prosecutors and victims now is fighting judges' censorship orders. To date, she said, there has been no federal court ruling on the matter. ... Murphy tried when she …
» Vollständiger ArtikelHandakte WebLAWg | 1. Oktober 2008 — This just in, from the hardworking Ben Winograd over at SCOTUS blog: The High Court has denied rehearing in Kennedy v. Louisi…
Jurabilis | 31. Juli 2009 — New Jersey's Committee on Attorney Advertising held a hearing Monday to decide whether legal ethics rules were violated by the …
Jurabilis | 20. März 2006 — Eine kleine Nachhilfe: The death penalty trial of Zacarias Moussaoui may be abandoned, prosecutors told the judge on Wednesday. …
USA Recht | 18. Juni 2010 — American Bar Association / Busines Law Today. Volume 19, Number 5 May/June 2010: Jurors jump back With continuing high unemp…
Transblawg | 14. Juni 2011 — Adam Liptak in the New York Times: In a decision last week in a patent case, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. puzzled out the m…
Transblawg | 8. März 2012 — Mark Liberman at Language Log has once again, in two posts, discussed the use of corpora in US courts. I've previously mentioned h…
Law & Justice | 26. November 2005 — The Massachusetts court system evaluates its judges as part of the continuing programme, since 2001, to evaluate and enha…
Transblawg | 17. Oktober 2005 — For some reason best know to itself, the local paper had an article comparing criminal procedure throughout Europe on the front…
Transblawg | 19. Juni 2007 — Here's an entry I never got round to publishing, because I didn't get round to investigating the German situation. Under the …
Streitsache / Blog | 27. Juli 2007 — Human Brain Cloud ist ein Multiplayer-Wort-Assoziations "Spiel" von Kyle Gabler. The idea is that given a word, a player types i…
Usually we leave it up to the linguists and philosophers to muse on the crazy relationship between words and their meanings. In the law, words�the important ones, at least�are defined narrowly, and judges, lawyers, and jurors are trusted to understand thei