English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

A comparison between American Criminology and European Criminology is extremely interesting. If we look at outstanding works of modern American criminology such as those by Hugo Muensterberg (1), John Henry Wigmore (2), Robert H. Gault (3), Nathaniel F. Cantor (4), Roscoe Pound (5), Sol Sheldon Glueck (6), Harold Ernest Burtt (7), Henry Weihofen (8), Edwin H. Sutherland (9), Francis C. Ainsworth Mitchell (10), Joseph N. Ulman (11) on the one side and at outstanding works of modern European criminology as those by Hans Gross (12), Otto Moenkemoeller (13), Erich Wulffen (14), Gustav Aschaffenburg (15), Hans v. Hentig (16), Albert Hellwig (17) (Germany); Cesare Lombroso (18), Enrico Ferri (19), Enrico Altavilla (20), Francesco Pagano (21) (Italy); Zangger (22) (Switzerland); Emile Fourquet (23) Maurice Lailler and Henri Vonoven (24) (France), on the other side, we find a striking similarity of problems and methods. The criminal and the witness are the central problem everywhere, not the judge and the jury. Everywhere there has been collected enormous, valuable material about the psychology of the criminal, the fallibility of testimony, the unreliability of evidence by expert witnesses, but the main problem, the psychology of criminal justice itself, is neglected. We are in the strange position of possessing a psychology of the criminal and the witness, but not of the judge and the jury. We find the most striking evidence of this fact in the work "Psychologie und Psychopathologie der Aussage" by Otto Moenkemoeller (13); only two of the four hundred twenty-five pages of this work are devoted to the psychology of the judge, while all the rest deals with the criminal and the witness. A glance at his bibliography gives further evidence for our statement. And so we have a criminology which is neglecting its main problem, that is to say, the psychology of just that person who has to make the decision and has to assume the responsibility for the life or death of the defendant. This responsibility is very heavy: the life or death of the defendant is at stake, not only when a death sentence is involved; a man of blameless conduct, who is convicted of fraud or forgery, is just as well dead. Thus arises the very serious problem of wrongful conviction. A comparison between American and European criminology shows the second striking similarity, that this problem is neglected in both of them. There are very few 1 60 E. 42nd St., New York City, (Dr. Jur).

Pathology of Criminal Justice. Innocent Convicted in Three Murder Cases