Abstract
David Lorimer applies a quantitatively analytical approach to criminal law. He has written previously for SLN on jury analysis and the admissibility of prejudicial evidence (with a journal paper currently under peer review). In this article he indicates how his work led to similar conclusions to research featured in a recent article in The Times. He highlights two key legally problematic factors which substantiate the Times article’s empirical research findings from a more analytical perspective.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Publisher | Scottish Legal News |
Publication status | Published - 4 Oct 2018 |