Aspects of Deconstruction: Thought Control in Xanadu
Northwestern University - School of Law
August 13, 2010
Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 84, No. 3/4, 1990
Northwestern Public Law Research Paper No. 10-36
Nearly every case in nearly every legal system is a case where the factfinder – that is, the judge or jury – must decide what was going on in the minds of the litigants. For example, every criminal case turns on mens rea – a guess that the defendant harbored thoughts amounting to criminal intent. Tort cases involve the intention of the defendant, or at least his reckless indifference to risk. Estate cases require the probate court to assess the intent of the testator. Antitrust cases involve the question whether there was an intent to form a combination in restraint of trade. I can't think of a single case where the mental processes of one or both of the litigating parties – whatever the jury says those processes are – doesn't play a critical role in the outcome.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 8
Keywords: mens rea, thought control by statute, hunches in judicial decisions
JEL Classification: K10, K30, K40, K49Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: August 15, 2010
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.578 seconds