An introduction to judicial fact-finding

Bell, Evan

doi:10.1080/03050718.2013.815119

Cited by 6 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings from trial observations are consistent with the literature (e.g., Bell, 2013;McElhaney, 2014;Ross, 2005;Wellman, 1997) that cross-examination of witnesses serves a variety of functions, including the following:…”

Section: Cross-examinationsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Although a speedy trial is considered one of the most significant factors driving the criminal justice system's effectiveness, it should be noted that the primary objective of a trial is to discover the truth. Still, the empirical data from interviews and trial observations support much of the previous literature on case management procedures in some other common law countries, e.g., England, Australia, and the United States (Asimow, 2007;Bell, 2013;Findley, 2011).…”

Section: Before the Trial Of Hearing Evidencesupporting

confidence: 65%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The importance of fact-finding in criminal trials: a study of judges' work in the courts of justice in Thailand

Samasaed¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>What should be the role of Thai judges in the administration of criminal justice? There is the adversarial process, most commonly practiced in the Anglo-American world, where judges act as neutral referees. And there is the inquisitorial process, most commonly found in continental Europe, where judges are active fact-finders to determine ‘the truth’ in a particular case. The Thai criminal justice system is a mixture of both adversarial and inquisitorial systems. The rules of evidence prescribed in the Criminal Procedure Code, B.E. 2477 (1934), also provide judges with the power to actively engage in fact-finding during the trial, as is the case for judges in inquisitorial countries. This is especially the case in sections 228, 229, and 235, which allow judges to question witnesses or examine additional evidence to ensure that they have sufficient evidence to make an accurate judgment. However, the limited Thai research, anecdotal evidence, and personal experience indicate that Thai judges have a limited role in fact-finding during criminal trials. This can then mean that their judgments may be based on insufficient or defective evidence. This research explains how Thai judges approach their work and justify their limited role in fact-finding in criminal trials, despite having the legal power to be more involved in the process of justice as fact-finders. The research is based on the examination of documents, the researcher’s prosecutorial and judicial experiences, trial observations, and individual in-depth interviews with judges in the Courts of First Instance, the Courts of Appeal, and the Supreme Court. It shows that apart from discrepancies in the relevant laws, judges’ reluctance to become more involved in fact-finding is caused by the judicial organization’s norms, which do not obviously take priority over the active judicial function of fact-finding. The thesis concludes with a discussion of what should be done to improve the fact-finding function of Thai judges to reduce erroneous judgments and inappropriate sentences resulting from defective or incomplete evidence.</p>

show abstract

Section: Cross-examinationsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Before the Trial Of Hearing Evidencesupporting

confidence: 65%

The importance of fact-finding in criminal trials: a study of judges' work in the courts of justice in Thailand

Samasaed¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on the witnesses' credibility, judges will give more or less weight to their testimony. This is how judges will often decide what happened when witnesses have different accounts of a same event (Paciocco, 2010;Bell, 2013).…”

Section: The Detrimental Effects Of Misconceptions About Nonverbal Cumentioning

confidence: 99%

Misconceptions About Nonverbal Cues to Deception: A Covert Threat to the Justice System?

Denault

2020

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Our brief overview describes the pervasive and complex role of nonverbal communication during in-person exchanges, including those in courtrooms. Because one of the main functions of judges in bench trials and jurors in jury trials is to understand witnesses, and to ascertain the sometimes complex facts to which the law will apply (Bell 2013 ; Denault et al 2019a ; Denault and Jupe 2018 ; Paciocco 2010 ), the critical role of nonverbal communication in courtrooms should be weighed before limiting in-person trials and replacing them with phone and computer applications on a regular basis. The Supreme Court of Canada emphasized that “credibility is an issue that pervades most trials, and at its broadest may amount to a decision on guilt or innocence” (R. v. Handy 2002 , p. 951) and that “effective cross-examination is integral to the conduct of a fair trial and a meaningful application of the presumption of innocence” (R. v. N. S. 2012 , p. 743; see also Mattox v. United States 1895 ).…”

Section: The Role Of Nonverbal Communication During Trialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Justice and Nonverbal Communication in a Post-pandemic World: An Evidence-Based Commentary and Cautionary Statement for Lawyers and Judges

Denault

Patterson

2020

J Nonverbal Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization officially declared COVID-19 a pandemic. The new physical distancing rules have had many consequences, some of which are felt throughout the justice system. Courts across the world limited their operations. Nonetheless, given that justice delayed is justice denied, many jurisdictions have turned to technologies for urgent matters. This paper offers an evidence-based comment and caution for lawyers and judges who could be inclined, for concerns such as cost and time saving, to permanently step aside from in-person trials. Using nonverbal communication research, in conjunction with American and Canadian legal principles, we argue that such a decision could harm the integrity of the justice system.

show abstract

An introduction to judicial fact-finding

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

The importance of fact-finding in criminal trials: a study of judges' work in the courts of justice in Thailand

The importance of fact-finding in criminal trials: a study of judges' work in the courts of justice in Thailand

Misconceptions About Nonverbal Cues to Deception: A Covert Threat to the Justice System?

Justice and Nonverbal Communication in a Post-pandemic World: An Evidence-Based Commentary and Cautionary Statement for Lawyers and Judges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About