1. Describe these two judicial philosophies. Judicial Activism is when judges/courts do not strictly stick to the interpretation of a law, but create a new one. Easily explained, when an issue is being ruled upon, courts establish a new law to rule broadly on the issue rather than limit their verdict. A lot of magistrates go beyond the constitution and statutes words and use their own political and personal thoughts.
Analyse the ways history and memory generate compelling and unexpected insights. In your response, make detailed reference to your prescribed text and at least ONE other related text of your own choosing. History and memory are both multifaceted ideas that are challenged continually. History is often perceived as fact, in the recount of an event or retelling of a story that did in fact, take place. Through study however, it becomes clear that history is a consequence of memory, which makes it unreliable and changed by circumstance.
Rudolf von Jhering, a German jurist recognised law as a means of ordering society in a situation where there are many competing interests, not all economic. His view was that legal developments were driven by the constant tussle between individuals and groups within society to have their interests portrayed and supported by the law. He expressed that law could be used in self-interest by individuals and groups in order to achieve advances in their own purposes. As a result, the law acts to determine the true balance between different interests by examining the value of each. The American legal scholar, Roscoe Pound, was influenced by Jhering.
Policy is an important consideration for the courts to decide the duty owed by defendants. Lord Bridge suggested that it should be fair, just and reasonable when imposing duty on defendant. It is thought that the imposition of a duty solely base on foreseeability of damage is not desirable. As Winfield and Jolowicz suggests that “the court must decide not simply whether there is or is not a duty, but whether there should or should not be one.” For the purpose of this essay, I will discuss how policy can influence the imposition of duty. The most important policy concern has always been the “floodgates argument”.
* * * * * Research Process and Terminology * ME * CJA/334 * March 5, 2014 * Dennis Dougan * Research Process and Terminology * How will this new terminology and knowledge apply to a career in criminal justice? Essentially, understanding the terminology that is associated with a specific career path is important because of the use it gets in the line of work. In criminal justice and other social science careers, the terminology carries over and without understanding it completely, terminology can hinder research capabilities as well as understanding previous research materials. Although different criminal justice careers have their own terminology based on their line of work, the research terminology is nearly universal. How can not knowing the proper terminology affect you as you conduct criminal justice research?
“Whenever the courts draw a line to mark out the bounds of duty, they do it as a matter of policy so as to limit the responsibility of the defendant”. (Spartan Steel v Martin & Co  QB 27, per Lord Denning, MR) Discuss the above proposition, with reference to at least three cases. Maximum 600 words (excluding citations in footnotes; other text in footnotes counts towards the word limit). One cannot deny that policy has always been a contributory factor in determining the existence and extent of duty owed by the defendant in atypical cases. Despite being restrictive of the responsibility of the defendant most of the time, it does, however, also extend the liability of the defendant in certain cases.
It has been long debated that the issues of social justice such as inequality, poverty and social exclusion are divided between social welfare and crime control territories. Whilst some distinguished responses to this particular subject matter become the focal point of social welfare strategies, others become the emphasis of crime control interventions therefore suggesting that the boundary between the two is by no means beyond limitation and as such is implied “to be mobile and porous” (Newman & Yates (2008), p168). There are many entanglements between social welfare and crime control policies and upon further investigation it becomes more evident the similarities of the objectives between the two. Social welfare is geared towards a governmental support mechanism set up to contest social impairments such as poverty and racism whereas crime control is a stabilising mechanism that has been set up to restore and maintain this social order by penalising those who pose a risk against its safekeeping. The term ‘porous’ suggests that there is barrier between social welfare services and crime control services but that there are gaps in this barrier allowing both side to communicate.
13. What contribution does this book make to political science? The fundamental nature of this book make it an essential contribution to political science. When learning about politics and government it is a must to understand the evolution of laws. This book illustrates the importance of how not being involved in politics and government can allow the powers that be to rule its people with absolute unchecked power.
ASSESS THE USEFULNESS OF REALIST THEORIES FOR UNDERSTANDING C+D IN SOCIETY TODAY. Both left and right wing sociologists have attempted to develop ‘realistic’ theories of crime that offer practical solutions in dealing with the issue. However, the way these two approaches go about this is radically different, as right and left realism are from completely opposite ends of the political spectrum. Although like all sociological/criminological theories, they have their limitations and flaws, both approaches have proven useful in understanding crime and deviance for a number of reasons. Left realism is particularly useful in understanding crime and deviance because it avoids the age old divisions between structure and action.
I will then attempt to form a more thorough argument through drawing similarities between judicial interpretations of conventional semantic meanings of statutory and constitutional texts, linking them back to an understanding of systematic differences in existing legal topography. This will aid in expanding their research beyond the limitations of the “new realist”approach, where each factor is treated as an empirical hypothesis, subject to test. Foundations of New Legal Realism Although it draws on classical Legal Realism from the first half of the twentieth century, New Legal Realism (NLR) differs, mainly, in it's projection beyond it's predecessor's emphasis on judges, courts, and formal legal systems. NLR by a “ground-level up” structure, which focuses on non-expert experiences with law as well as studying legal