Juries And The Transformation Of Criminal Justice In France In The Nineteenth And Twentieth Centuries

James Donovan takes a comprehensive approach to the history of the jury in modern France by investigating the legal, political, sociocultural, and intellectual aspects of jury trial from the Revolution through the twentieth century. He demonstrates that t

James Donovan takes a comprehensive approach to the history of the jury in modern France by investigating the legal, political, sociocultural, and intellectual aspects of jury trial from the Revolution through the twentieth century. He demonstrates that these juries, through their decisions, helped shape reform of the nation's criminal justice system. From their introduction in 1791 as an expression of the sovereignty of the people through the early 1900s, argues Donovan, juries often acted against the wishes of the political and judicial authorities, despite repeated governmental attempts to manipulate their composition. High acquittal rates for both political and nonpolitical crimes were in part due to juror resistance to the harsh and rigid punishments imposed by the Napoleonic Penal Code, Donovan explains. In response, legislators gradually enacted laws to lower penalties for certain crimes and to give jurors legal means to offer nuanced verdicts and to ameliorate punishments. Faced with persistently high acquittal rates, however, governments eventually took powers away from juries by withdrawing many cases from their purview and ultimately destroying the panels' independence in 1941.

The Limits of Criminological Positivism: The Movement for Criminal Law Reform in the West, 1870-1940 presents the first major study of the limits of criminological positivism in the West and establishes the subject as a field of interest. The volume will explore those limits and bring to life the resulting doctrinal, procedural, and institutional compromises of the early twentieth century that might be said to have defined modern criminal justice administration. The book examines the topic not only in North America and western Europe, with essays on Italy, Germany, France, Spain, the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Finland but also the reception and implementation of positivist ideas in Brazil. In doing so, it explores three comparative elements: (1) the differing national experiences within the civil law world; (2) differences and similarities between civil law and common law regimes; and (3) some differences between the two leading common-law countries. It interrogates many key aspects of current penal systems, such as the impact of extra-legal scientific knowledge on criminal law, preventive detention, the ‘dual-track’ system with both traditional punishment and novel measures of security, the assessment of offenders’ dangerousness, juvenile justice, and the indeterminate sentence. As a result, this study contributes to a critical understanding of some inherent contradictions characterizing criminal justice in contemporary western societies. Written in a straight-forward and direct manner, this volume will be of great interest to academics and students researching historical criminology, philosophy, political science, and legal history.

The majority of common law jurisdictions, and some civil law jurisdictions, use juries composed of citizens drawn from the general population to deliberate and reach collective verdicts in criminal cases. Juries are relied on to use their collective judgment to reach verdicts that accord with normative legal goals; for example, by being accurate and fair. How Juries Work suggests that, though important symbolically, the current jury system is not necessarily well-designed to meet the demands of modern society, which increasingly requires evidence-based procedure that is carefully designed to achieve normative goals. Rebecca K. Helm proposes new models of how jurors and juries function in practice, informed by psychological theory and empirical research, which provides a framework to interpret and integrate the large body of existing work on jury decision-making. Drawing on this framework, Helm highlights the deficiencies and strengths of the jury as a legal factfinder, providing key insights into how to minimise deficiencies and maximise strengths through trial procedure. The book concludes with a set of timely evidence-based suggestions as to how procedure surrounding trial by jury might be altered to enhance the administration of justice in the many jurisdictions where the criminal law jury is utilised. How Juries Work integrates legal and psychological theory and research to present a comprehensive assessment of the modern criminal law jury, and of how evidence-based research can improve jury performance.

As the 19th century drew to a close, France and Italy experienced an explosion of crime, vagrancy, insanity, neurosis and sexual deviance. “Misfits” in Fin-de-Siècle France and Italy examines how the raft of self-appointed experts that subsequently emerged tried to explain this aberrant behavior and the many consequences this had. Susan A. Ashley considers why these different phenomena were understood to be interchangeable versions of the same inborn defects. The book looks at why specialists in newly-minted disciplines in medicine and the social sciences, such as criminology, neurology and sexology, all claimed that biological flaws – some inherited and some arising from illness or trauma – made it impossible for these 'misfits' to adapt to modern life. Ashley then goes on to analyse the solutions these specialists proposed, often distinguishing between born deviants who belonged in asylums or prisons and 'accidental misfits' who deserved solidarity and social support through changes to laws relating to issues like poverty and unemployment. The study draws on a comprehensive examination of contemporary texts and features the work of leading authorities like Cesare Lombroso, Jean-Martin Charcot, and Théodule Ribot, as well as investigators less known now but influential at the time. The comparative aspect also interestingly shows that experts collaborated closely across national and disciplinary borders, employed similar methods and arrived at common conclusions. This is a valuable study for all social and cultural historians of France and Italy and anyone interested in knowing more about the history of medicine in modern Europe.

"I owe a great debt to the many jurors, judges, lawyers, trial consultants, historians, and academics around the world from whom I have had the pleasure of learning about the jury. Traci Emerson Spackey of the George Washington University Law Library provided extraordinarily creative and effective help in locating images and other sources. Clifford Ando gave valuable recommendations about sources for the ancient world, and Daniela Cammack kindly provided drafts of her now-published article about Athenian juries. Trial lawyer Bobby Burchfield generously gave detailed and deeply knowledgeable comments on the manuscript. Karen Wahl provided expert assistance locating sources. I thank Morgan Reinhardt for allowing me to use her research on jury forepersons, and Anna Offit, her law professor, for guiding me to her and for comparative work on juries. Anna Caraveli and Jonathan Chaves, my colleague at George Washington University, made important suggestions and pointed out places in which non-lawyers needed further explanation of legal concepts. My daughter Anna Lerner provided the perspective of a younger reader and gently let her mother know where improvements would be helpful. For decades, John Langbein has been a constant source of insight about juries. I am grateful to Akhil Amar for first sparking, and then encouraging, my interest in the subject, and for his vibrant work. My husband Craig Lerner gave unceasing encouragement and invaluable advice"--

An insightful analysis of the rise of forensic medicine in modern France and doctors' authority in the legal arena.