Blame, moral standing and the legitimacy of the criminal trial

Ratio 23 (2):123-140 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I begin by discussing the ways in which a would-be blamer's own prior conduct towards the person he seeks to blame can undermine his standing to blame her. This provides the basis for an examination of a particular kind of 'bar to trial' in the criminal law – of ways in which a state or a polity's right to put a defendant on trial can be undermined by the prior misconduct of the state or its officials. The examination of this often neglected legal phenomenon illuminates some central features of the criminal law and the criminal process, and some of the preconditions for the legitimacy of the criminal law in a liberal republic

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,505

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-04-20

Downloads
257 (#104,087)

6 months
23 (#133,093)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

R. A. Duff
University of Stirling

Citations of this work

The Commitment Account of Hypocrisy.Benjamin Rossi - 2018 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 21 (3):553-567.
The Walk and the Talk.Daniela Dover - 2019 - Philosophical Review 128 (4):387-422.
Hypocrisy is Vicious, Value-Expressing Inconsistency.Benjamin Rossi - 2020 - The Journal of Ethics 25 (1):57-80.

View all 55 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references