John H. Langbein
![]() |
Torture and the Law of Proof: Europe and England in the Ancien Régime
7 editions
—
published
1977
—
|
|
![]() |
History of the Common Law: The Development of Anglo-American Legal Institutions (Aspen Casebook)
by
2 editions
—
published
2009
—
|
|
![]() |
LANGBEIN:ORIGINS OF ADVERSARY CRIMINAL TRIAL OSMLH PAPER
7 editions
—
published
2003
—
|
|
![]() |
Langbein And Waggoner's Uniform Trust And Estate Statutes, 2005-2006 (University Casebook)
by
10 editions
—
published
2002
—
|
|
![]() |
Prosecuting Crime In The Renaissance: England, Germany, France
7 editions
—
published
1974
—
|
|
![]() |
Pension And Employee Benefit Law (University Casebook)
11 editions
—
published
1995
—
|
|
![]() |
Selected Statutes on Trusts & Estates, 1989 Edition
by
5 editions
—
published
1989
—
|
|
![]() |
2004 Supplement to Pension and Employee Benefit Law
by |
|
![]() |
Pension and Employee Benefit Law, 4th Edition, 2007 Supplement (University Casebook)
by
4 editions
—
published
2002
—
|
|
![]() |
Pension and Employee Benefit Law, 2008 Supplement (University Casebook)
by
—
published
2008
|
|
“William Ireland, one of the Popish Plot defendants charged with plotting the assassination of Charles II, spoke at trial about his inability to prepare a defense when imprisoned and unaided. He named alibi witnesses who could prove that he was in Staffordshire, far from the scene of Oates’ and Bedloe’s allegations. “[O]n calling his first witness he observed, ‘It is a hundred to one if he be here, for I have not been permitted so much as to send a scrap of paper.’ “87 His witnesses did not appear, and Ireland and his codefendants were convicted and executed.”
― The Origins of Adversary Criminal Trial
― The Origins of Adversary Criminal Trial
“The implicit remedy for this one-sidedness, and the route that would be mapped out in the Treason Trials Act of 1696, was two-sidedness. The preamble to the Act would trumpet the principle of equalizing the defense, a principle that the Act would implement most fundamentally by allowing the defendant to have access to counsel both in the pretrial and at trial. Persons accused of treason would be allowed to defend themselves in the way the state prosecuted them, with lawyers. The accused would be allowed the help of lawyers to prepare defensive evidence in the pretrial, to examine defense witnesses and cross-examine prosecution witnesses, and to serve as advocates at trial.”
― The Origins of Adversary Criminal Trial
― The Origins of Adversary Criminal Trial
“The 1696 Act would provide for the right to consult lawyers in the pretrial for the purpose of developing defensive proofs, and for advance disclosure of the indictment and the names of prospective jurors.91 The Act did not, however, call for the disclosure of information about prosecution witnesses or their projected testimony, the step now known as pretrial discovery of the prosecution case. (Discovery of this sort would long be resisted, ostensibly for fear that persons allied with the defendant might intimidate or otherwise interfere with the accusing witnesses.)”
― The Origins of Adversary Criminal Trial
― The Origins of Adversary Criminal Trial
Is this you? Let us know. If not, help out and invite John to Goodreads.