21 Pages Posted: 18 Jul 2013 Last revised: 28 Sep 2013
Date Written: July 17, 2013
Even as we endeavor to give criminal defendants the means and license to raise reasonable doubts -- to put investigations on trial -- we need to think more about when and how those doubts can be allayed. What tools should we give jurors to assess the alleged holes – the “reasonableness” of an alleged doubt? And how can the prosecution try to mend them? How we answer these questions will affect the value of trials as a systemic regulatory mechanism in a world with very few trials. Sparked by Dan Simon’s work on the “diagnosticity” of criminal trials, this essay proposes a quiet reframing of trials as regulatory interventions into a sparsely regulated world.
Keywords: criminal trials, evidence, prosecutions, criminal investigations
JEL Classification: K41, K14
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Richman, Daniel C., Framing the Prosecution (July 17, 2013). Columbia Public Law Research Paper No. 13-361. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2295132 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2295132