Father in Jail

A review of Making Fathers Pay: The Enforcement of Child Support by David L. Chamber

The Death Penalty Dialogue Between Law and Social Science (Symposium Keynote Address)

Symposium: The Capital Jury Projec

Pennsylvania\u27s Proposed Film Censorship Law - House Bill 1098

The trend of Pennsylvania and United States Supreme Court decisions during the past decade has steadily reduced the number of lawful methods which Pennsylvania law enforcement officials may use to prevent the public exhibition of a motion picture they consider to be obscene. During the summer of 1965 in Allegheny County, for example, detectives attempted without success to halt the local showing of Promises! Promises!, a film which they believed was legally obscene. The detectives secured a search warrant, seized the films and arrested the exhibitors, charging them with the crime of exhibiting an obscene motion picture. The officers apparently intended to hold the films pending completion of the obscenity prosecution. If the films had been found obscene in the criminal action, they would have been forfeited to the Commonwealth; if not, they would have been returned to the exhibitors. The Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas, however, held that the county government could not interfere with the exhibition of the films prior to a judicial determination that they were actually obscene. By court order Promises! Promises! was returned to the exhibitors and presented as scheduled in neighborhood theaters

The Impact of Civilian Aggravating Factors on the Military Death Penalty (1984-2005): Another Chapter in the Resistance of the Armed Forces to the Civilianization of Military Justice

In 1984, the U.S. Armed Forces amended its capital punishment system for death eligible murder to bring it into compliance with Furman v. Georgia. Those amendments were modeled after death penalty legislation prevailing in over thirty states. After a brief period between 1986 and 1990, the charging decisions of commanders and the conviction and sentencing decisions of court martial members (jurors) transformed the military death penalty system into a dual system that treats two classes of death eligible murder quite differently. Since 1990, a member of the armed forces accused of a killing a commissioned officer or murder with a direct impact on the ability of military commanders to run an effective and disciplined military is significantly more likely to face a capital court martial and be sentenced to death than a similarly situated member accused of a murder connected to the military only fry the identity of the accused. This empirical study of charging and sentencing decisions in 104 death eligible military murders from 1984-2005 documents contemporary resistance to the civilianization of the military death penalty as manifest in charging and sentencing decisions. We conclude that a limitation of death eligible murder to those directly impacting military command and control could reduce the risk of arbitrariness in the administration of the military death penalty