Effigy: Images of Capital Defendants: Issues in Crime and Justice
Autor Allison M. Cottonen Limba Engleză Paperback – 8 iul 2010
The prosecuting attorneys depict the defendant as a "savage beast," juxtaposing their image against that of a "troubled youth" as Page is portrayed by the defense attorneys. Slowly and methodically developed as figures with diametrically opposed features, none of which overlap or congeal, both the images are portrayed as real (buttressed by the testimony of witnesses) rather than constructed. The jury is expected to render a verdict that accepts one and rejects the other: there is no middle ground.
Preț: 320.57 lei
Preț vechi: 413.00 lei
-22%
Puncte Express: 481
Preț estimativ în valută:
56.75€ • 65.91$ • 49.16£
56.75€ • 65.91$ • 49.16£
Carte tipărită la comandă
Livrare economică 03-17 martie
Preluare comenzi: 021 569.72.76
Specificații
ISBN-13: 9780739125526
ISBN-10: 0739125524
Pagini: 212
Dimensiuni: 155 x 234 x 14 mm
Greutate: 0.35 kg
Editura: Bloomsbury Publishing
Colecția Lexington Books
Seria Issues in Crime and Justice
Locul publicării:New York, United States
ISBN-10: 0739125524
Pagini: 212
Dimensiuni: 155 x 234 x 14 mm
Greutate: 0.35 kg
Editura: Bloomsbury Publishing
Colecția Lexington Books
Seria Issues in Crime and Justice
Locul publicării:New York, United States
Cuprins
Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 The Death Penalty in the U.S. and How Juries Operate Chapter 3 The Importance of Defining the Defendant Chapter 4 The Legal Fight Chapter 5 The Guilt Phase: How the Defense/Prosecution Saw their Mission Chapter 6 The Penalty Phase: The Prosecution/Defense's Mission Chapter 7 Who Is the Defendant? The Prosecution's/Defense's Answer Chapter 8 The Impact on Jurors Chapter 9 Conclusion
Recenzii
[Cotton] cites the relevant scientific research on juror decision making, and then takes a more open-ended approach to study how jurors reached a guilty verdict in this case. This ultimately provides valuable insight into how jurors are likely to make judgments about human behavior based on their own experience, rather than relying on expert testimony that challenges commonly held assumptions about rational action. Recommended.