The honeymoon killer : plea bargaining and intimate femicide : a response to Watson

In October 2003, US citizen Christina Thomas died while scuba diving on Queensland’s Great Barrier Reef. Following over five years of delays, her husband David Watson accepted a plea bargain to which he pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the basis of criminal negligence. Watson was initially sentenced to four and a half years imprisonment, suspended after 12 months, however this was later increased on appeal to suspension after 18 months. Using Watson as a framework for analysis, this article examines some of the limitations of an inefficient justice system, with a particular focus on the private nature of the plea bargaining process, and the potentially favourable representations and sentencing of men who kill a female intimate partner. The authors argue that the need to respond to court inefficiency and under-resourcing in the criminal courts creates pressures that can result in a desire for increased efficiency being prioritised above other justice concerns, and this allows for existing flaws within the operation of the criminal justice system to be exacerbated, and excused.

Apontamentos sobre política criminal e a plea bargaining / Walter Fanganiello maierovitch. --

Inclui bibliografia.

Literary concepts and the plea in mitigation

The article focuses on the plea in mitigation, one of the most common occurrences in the criminal justice system. Methods of approaching the plea in mitigation typically emphasize the need for the advocate to address the circumstances of the offence and offender. Typically, such matters are put forward as items on a list which the advocate must ensure are addressed during the plea in mitigation. Whilst it is important for those matters to be covered in providing the factual background, or context, of the offender and the offence, it is contended that in a plea in mitigation it is not sufficient nor adequate to simply present such matters to a judicial officer at sentencing and to allow those matters then to be assembled and interpreted by the sentencing judge.

The effects of language complexity in a counterattitudinal appeal to laypeople : an application of the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion to a legal issue

The effects of a complexly worded counterattitudinal appeal on laypeople's attitudes toward a legal issue were examined, using the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) of persuasion as a theoretical framework. This model states that persuasion can result from the elaboration and scrutiny of the message arguments (i.e., central route processing), or can result from less cognitively effortful strategies, such as relying on source characteristics as a cue to message validity (i.e., peripheral route processing). One hundred and sixty-seven undergraduates (85 men and 81 women) listened to eitller a low status or high status source deliver a counterattitudinal speech on a legal issue. The speech was designed to contain strong or weak arguments. These arguments were 'worded in a simple and, therefore, easy to comprehend manner, or in a complex and, therefore, difficult to comprehend manner. Thus, there were three experimental manipulations: argument comprehensibility (easy to comprehend vs. difficult to comprehend), argumel11 strength (weak vs. strong), and source status (low vs. high). After listening to tIle speec.J] participants completed a measure 'of their attitude toward the legal issue, a thought listil1g task, an argument recall task,manipulation checks, measures of motivation to process the message, and measures of mood. As a result of the failure of the argument strength manipulation, only the effects of the comprehel1sibility and source status manipulations were tested. There was, however, some evidence of more central route processing in the easy comprehension condition than in the difficult comprehension condition, as predicted. Significant correlations were found between attitude and favourable and unfavourable thoughts about the legal issue with easy to comprehend arguments; whereas, there was a correlation only between attitude and favourable thoughts 11 toward the issue with difficult to comprehend arguments, suggesting, perhaps, that central route processing, \vhich involves argument scrutiny and elaboration, occurred under conditions of easy comprehension to a greater extent than under conditions of difficult comprehension. The results also revealed, among other findings, several significant effects of gender. Men had more favourable attitudes toward the legal issue than did women, men recalled more arguments from the speech than did women, men were less frustrated while listening to the speech than were ,vomen, and men put more effort into thinking about the message arguments than did women. When the arguments were difficult to comprehend, men had more favourable thoughts and fewer unfavourable thoughts about the legal issue than did women. Men and women may have had different affective responses to the issue of plea bargaining (with women responding more negatively than men), especially in light of a local and controversial plea bargain that occurred around the time of this study. Such pre-existing gender differences may have led to tIle lower frustration, the greater effort, the greater recall, and more positive attitudes for men than for WOlnen. Results· from this study suggest that current cognitive models of persuasion may not be very applicable to controversial issues which elicit strong emotional responses. Finally, these data indicate that affective responses, the controversial and emotional nature ofthe issue, gender and other individual differences are important considerations when experts are attempting to persuade laypeople toward a counterattitudinal position.

An examination of how youth understand their rights during the criminal process

In order for young people to meaningfully participate in the criminal justice system they must possess an understanding of their rights and legal procedures. To examine their understanding, 50 young people between the ages of 13-17 who received an extrajudicial sanction or were sentenced to probation, were recruited from the Finch Courthouse in Toronto, Ontario. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants regarding their understanding of their due process rights and their rights under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Youth who indicated involvement in plea bargaining were also asked about their experiences during this procedure. In addition, the present study examined youths' perceptions of power differences in their interactions with criminal justice officials working within an institution that has tremendous control over offenders' lives. The results indicate that while youth seem to have some understanding oftheir rights and legal procedures, they nevertheless feel ill-equipped to invoke their rights in an adult-led criminal justice system. Furthermore, while past literature has often conceptualized youth understanding based on age (e.g., Crawford & Bull, 2006) the findings of the present study demonstrate that while age plays some role, the lack of power experienced by youth vis-a-vis adults, and specifically criminal justice professionals, has the most bearing on the inability of youth to exercise their rights.

Les négociations des plaidoyers de culpabilité : la pratique des avocats de la défense

La présente étude cherche à décrire et à comprendre les pratiques professionnelles des avocats de la défense lors des négociations des plaidoyers de culpabilité, phénomène très courant bien qu’encore trop peu connu. Nous nous sommes intéressées auxpropos de douze avocats de la défense travaillant au Palais de Justice de Montréal. Nos analyses mettent en évidence différents éléments liés à la cause, à l’accusé ou aux considérations professionnelles des avocats qui peuvent avoir une influence sur le déroulement des négociations, mais surtout, elles montrent comment ces éléments peuvent être interprétés différemment selon les avocats et les cas qu’ils défendent. De plus, le discours des avocats sur le déroulement des négociations laisse entrevoir des pratiques différentes entre eux, selon leurs niveaux d’implication (dans le dossier, dans leurs relations…).

Against settlement? Owen Fiss, ADR and Australian discrimination law

In his celebrated article, Against Settlement, Owen Fiss objected to settlement for, among other things, securing the peace while not necessarily delivering justice and denying the court the opportunity to interpret the law. Fiss sees settlement as a technique for streamlining court dockets, the civil equivalent of plea bargaining. This paper explores Fiss’s criticisms through the lens of resolving discrimination complaints in Australia. It argues that although it is valuable to offer complainants a system for resolving complaints quickly and informally, especially in a jurisdiction in which complainants are often from marginalised groups, it is also necessary to recognise that this system is limited in how effectively it can develop the law and, by extension, eradicate discrimination. In essence, the system’s operation epitomises Fiss’ opposition to settlement. Modifying the complaint resolution system would improve this situation. The paper concludes by proposing three reforms based on mechanisms used in comparable countries: introducing direct access to the court or tribunal; strengthening ADR by making it voluntary and incorporating a ‘rights-based’ approach; and encouraging the regular publication of specific information about settlements and significant cases.

Cartel deterrence and settlements: the Brazilian experience

Settlements are an important part of a program of cartel deterrence, particularly when the likelihood of conviction and the litigation costs are higher. This type of negotiated procedure to reach finality is in essence complementary to the fully adversarial procedures associated to the trial by the administrative or judicial courts, and to other investigative instruments, such as the leniency agreement. The Brazilian experience provides some insights about the different models of direct settlement in cartel cases and the complex interaction among settlements, leniency agreements, and trial outcome. First, there is leeway for the complementary models of settlements, the first oriented mainly to increasing the likelihood of detection, and the second oriented to saving social costs of litigation. Second, the concern with the preservation of the demand for leniency agreements led the competition authority to restrict the use of settlements, which are effectively designed for the defendants that are likely guilty and give higher value to finality. The recent experience illustrates that the current settlement policy has not caused any adverse effect on leniency agreements, while reducing litigation costs and granting finality in some cases.

El principio de oportunidad : análisis de Derecho comparado

La conformidad procesal es una de las manifestaciones más importantes del principio de oportunidad. Éste, en relación constante con el principio de legalidad, tiende a la agilización y el recorte de los trámites procesales, sin perjuicio de las garantías esenciales del procedimiento penal. Debido a sus ventajas se ha instalado tanto en el modelo norteamericano, a través del «plea bargaining», como en el modelo continental europeo.

Mining trading partners’ preferences for efficient multi-issue bargaining in E‑business

Classical negotiation models are weak in supporting real-world business negotiations because these models often assume that the preference information of each negotiator is made public. Although parametric learning methods have been proposed for acquiring the preference information of negotiation opponents, these methods suffer from the strong assumptions about the specific utility function and negotiation mechanism employed by the opponents. Consequently, it is difficult to apply these learning methods to the heterogeneous negotiation agents participating in e‑marketplaces. This paper illustrates the design, development, and evaluation of a nonparametric negotiation knowledge discovery method which is underpinned by the well-known Bayesian learning paradigm. According to our empirical testing, the novel knowledge discovery method can speed up the negotiation processes while maintaining negotiation effectiveness. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first nonparametric negotiation knowledge discovery method developed and evaluated in the context of multi-issue bargaining over e‑marketplaces.