The Presumption of Punishment

Criminal Law and Philosophy 8 (2):391-406 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The presumption of innocence undergirds the American criminal justice system. It is so fundamental that it is derived from the concepts of due process and the importance of a fair trial. An informed, historical understanding of the interaction between the presumption of innocence and key tenets of due process can help clarify the meaning and application of the presumption of innocence in the modern day. Due process, as developed throughout English and US. Colonial history leading up to the formation of the US. Constitution, has two important implications. First, due process provides a general guarantee of liberty against punishment or imprisonment without a fair trial. Second, due process requires that a jury, as opposed to a judge, determine the factual guilt of a defendant at trial. These two key tenets were historically fundamental to due process and should guide how the presumption of innocence impacts various stages of trial, including pretrial detention decisions and sentencing. Returning to a historical understanding of due process requires that judges not determine facts or punish individuals before a trial has occurred

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Right to be Presumed Innocent.Hamish Stewart - 2014 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 8 (2):407-420.
The Prosecutor and the Presumption of Innocence.Richard L. Lippke - 2014 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 8 (2):337-352.
Rethinking the presumption of innocence.Victor Tadros - 2006 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 1 (2):193-213.
Who is Presumed Innocent of What by Whom?Carl-Friedrich Stuckenberg - 2014 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 8 (2):301-316.
Loss of Innocence in Common Law Presumptions.Paul Roberts - 2014 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 8 (2):317-336.
Parental Rights and Due Process.Donald C. Hubin - 1999 - The Journal of Law and Family Studies 1 (2):123-150.
The right to trial by jury.Thom Brooks - 2004 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 21 (2):197–212.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-06-10

Downloads
95 (#166,884)

6 months
4 (#319,344)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references