...
首页> 外文期刊>Liverpool Law Review >Evidence of Atrocities or Atrocious Use of Evidence: The Controversial Use of Atrocity Film at Nuremberg
【24h】

Evidence of Atrocities or Atrocious Use of Evidence: The Controversial Use of Atrocity Film at Nuremberg

机译:暴行证据或残酷使用证据:纽伦堡有争议的残暴电影使用

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This article focuses upon the utilisation of film evidence in criminal proceedings. It describes and evaluates the historical deployment of this type of material at War Crimes Trials, with particular emphasis upon the International Military Tribunal established at Nuremberg, in 1945, in the wake of the Second World War. During this Trial, the prosecution placed reliance upon the film, Nazi Concentration Camps, depicting with graphic realism the horrific barbarism of the Nazi regime. However, this was only made possible by the implementation of innovatory evidential procedures, effectively circumventing the hearsay rule. A comparison is drawn between this, and the current position in England and Wales, following the recent relaxation of the traditional embargo upon hearsay evidence. However, film evidence of the type adduced at Nuremberg may be more prejudicial than probative and should such circumstances arise, the interests of justice may not truly be served.
机译:本文重点介绍电影证据在刑事诉讼中的运用。它描述和评估了战争罪审判中这类材料的历史部署,特别着重于第二次世界大战后于1945年在纽伦堡成立的国际军事法庭。在这次审判中,检方依靠电影《纳粹集中营》,以图形写实主义描绘了纳粹政权的恐怖野蛮行径。但是,只有通过实施创新的证据程序才能有效地绕过传闻证据规则,才有可能做到这一点。在最近根据传闻证据对传统禁运放宽之后,对此进行了比较,并将其与英格兰和威尔士目前的状况进行了比较。但是,在纽伦堡引证的电影证据可能比证明证据更具偏见,并且在这种情况下,正义的利益可能无法得到真正满足。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号