“The Impression of Reality”： Fiction and Testimony in Dostoevsky＇s Notes

Truth of fiction might sound like a paradox, at least within the Platonic doxa. But perhaps there is no truth without fiction; Plato＇s own myths would testify to this necessary combination of ＂history＂ and ＂story＂ （histoire, storia, Geschichte, etc.）. Still, it might be not enough simply to affirm the necessity of fictional narrative for an historical account. In some cases, it would be difficult to accept a fictional aspect of historical testimony. Jorge Semprdn claims, on the other hand, that only fiction is able to communicate a traumatic, ＂unbearable＂ experience such as the one of prison camps. He refers to the work of Fyodor Dostoevsky as his model. My paper analyzes this testimonial aspect of Dostoevsky＇s Notes, especially the Notes from a Dead House. It shows, the particularity of this work, which combines an intense personal experience with a fictional elaboration, a quasi-novelistic setting, plot, and characters. I claim that in a sense such a combination might be considered as a model for literature in general, for its testimonial value, for its truth.

Testimony信念的确证——超越还原论与非还原论的新途径及对该途径的补充

Testimony被视为一个重要的知识来源。Testimony信念的确证是testimony知识论中的一个基本问题。对于这个问题,知识论学者们长期争论不休,主要分为还原论和非还原论两种主张,但这两种主张都面临难着以解决的困难。不过,近十年来出现了两个很有创见的新理论,即詹妮弗·拉基(Jennifer Lackey)和保罗·福克纳(Paul Faulkner)分别所提出的testimony信念确证的理论。这两个理论是对还原论和非还原论的片面性的超越,这是文章重点论述的。此外,针对这两种新理论,文本给出了一个补充,即认为语境在testimony信念确证中也是一个不可忽视的因素。

Research on the Legal Attributes and Values of Forensic Testimony in Criminal Proceedings from the Perspective of Legal Norms

From the perspective of legal norms, the legal attributes of forensic testimony in the course of criminal proceedings are manifested in two forms： one is the collection of evidence; the other is the exercise of power. However, the values residing in these two legal attributes are not the same. The former emphasizes ＂justice,＂ and the latter, ＂efficiency.＂ An analysis of the legal norms governing forensic testimony in different periods shows that forensic testimony in criminal proceedings is gradually shifting from a pattern dominated by the exercise of power to one characterized by the collection of evidence. However, a genuine return to the essential character of forensic testimony as the collection of evidence must be premised on a change in the value orientation of the Criminal Procedure Law, that is, on a change from ＂efficiency＂ to ＂justice.＂

How to Ensure Children’s Credibility of Testimony in Sexual Abuse Cases

There were several sexual abuse cases in Taiwan where the defendants having committed child rapes either received light punishment or held not guilty.This led to the White Rose Movement in 2010,whereby the court decisions were criticized ruthlessly by people.Among those problematic court decisions with absurd reasoning,we have suspected that the legislative purpose of statutory rape and that of forcible rape applied to children and adults separately were mistakenly mixed.It resulted in the consent of intercourse becoming a legal constituent requirement taken into consideration in child rape cases.However,a child’s consent on sex is invalid in the U.S.laws.Since the child’s testimony was thought less creditable by some psychologists,Taiwan Residents courts have admitted the reports of defendant’s polygraph and child victim’s hymen tests to be presented in court to ensure the child’s credibility.This paper,thus,based on Taiwan’s judicial experience,aims to explore the child’s credibility of testimony from legal and forensic linguistic aspects and to present an assessing method for reference.

The Shifting Landscape of Latent Print Testimony:An American Perspective

Friction ridge comparison testimony in the United States has long been characterized by speaking in absolutes:fingerprints are unique,the Analysis,Comparison,Evaluation,and Verification methodology has a zero-error rate,and the testimony presented by the expert should be regarded as an incontrovertible fact.Once the National Research Council released their watershed report in 2009,questioning and criticizing these clear overstatements of the strength of the evidence,many commentators and professional organizations recommended that the friction ridge community rethink the way their evidence was presented in reports and in court.Yet,change has been slow to come.While some agencies have begun a shift in the way they present their findings,many others still testify the same way they always have.This paper presents the historical context of where American friction ridge testimony has been,lays out the arguments for why it needs to change,describes some recent efforts to improve,and highlights some likely directions for the future of friction ridge reporting and testimony in the United States.

Do Stress and Anxiety Impact Memory? An Exploratory Portuguese Study

Eyewitness memory is widely studied in the forensic context,due to their proneness to make unreliable testimonies.Understanding which factors may impact memory is determinant to avoid wrongful convictions in court.In this exploratory study,the relation between stress and anxiety and memory errors(spontaneous and induced)was analyzed being hypothesized that negative emotions may impair memory performance.Crime and neutral videos were presented to 80 volunteer university students in a between subject-design.They were asked to fill some stress and anxiety scales throughout the experimental task,as well as a free recall task.Also,it was presented several questions about the videos in which spontaneous and induced errors were assessed.Results suggests that stress and anxiety did not influence the quantity of memory errors for both genders.However,overall memory performance was poor for both conditions.Our results were discussed in light to existing theories about the relation between stress-anxiety and memory.

Experts in Natural Resource Damages and Toxic Tort Litigation

Expert testimony plays a critical role in environmental and toxic tort litigation [1]. While most litigation settles, the work of an expert should, from the outset, be prepared with trial in mind. First and foremost, an expert, using the appropriate expertise, must be able to resolve questions that will assist the trier of fact in making determinations necessary under the law applicable to the case. In addition, an expert must demonstrate a solid scientific foundation in all of his or her opinions. Once armed with the opinions reached in the case, the forensic expert should work with the trial team to simplify proof, clarify the presentation and integrate it with other trial proof and themes [2]. This effort should include the realistic identification of any perceived or real shortcomings regarding the information available, the approach taken by or conclusions reached by the expert. Ongoing communication between the trial team and the expert throughout the discovery and pre-trial litigation is essential.

Children witness a systematic research

in China, children witness has not been articled in three procedural laws, some scholar do not think that either children nor other person with no legal capacity should have witness qualification.in fact, although some other countries do not admit the qualification of children witnesses under certain age,they do not take it as the factor to measure whether a witness has qualification or not.It is the judge who can decide whether a witness has qualification or not.Based on the these foreign counlries＇ s experience,we should not limit the qualification of children witnesses in the legislation. However, for the particularity of children＇s cognitive ability,we should embody this particularity when we judge children＇s testimony and protect children witnesses.

Children witness --a systematic research

In China, children witness has not been articled in three procedural laws, some scholar do not think that either children nor other person with no legal capacity should have witness qualification.In fact, although some other countries do not admit the qualification of children witnesses under certain age, they do not take it as the factor to measure whether a witness has qualification or not. It is the judge who can decide whether a witness has qualification or not. Based on the these foreign countries＇s experience, we should not limit the qualification of children witnesses in the legislation. However, for the particularity of children＇s cognitive ability, we should embody this particularity when we judge children＇s testimony and protect children witnesses.

Will the Holocaust Please Hush？ Social and Historical Incongruity in Savyon Liebrecht＇s “Hayuta＇s Engagement Party”

Mendel, a survivor of Auschwitz who lives in Israel, remains silent for 40 years after his traumatic experiences. However, Mendel, for no reason that his daughter Bella, also a survivor, can discern, begins to testify to his horrific ordeals during the Holocaust at putatively inopportune times, such as religious holidays and family celebrations. When his granddaughter Hayuta plans an engagement party, the social and historical incongruities of the Holocaust in the context of contemporary Israeli society become apparent. Ordinary pleasures are matters of moral obloquy in the face of the unfathomable black hole of the Holocaust. While critics have charged Mendel＇s daughter with preoccupation with invidious social climbing and his granddaughter Hayuta with moral reprehensible compartmentalization of her historical and familial existences, Liebrecht unwittingly implies that historical trauma has very diverse and inexplicable effects on different family members： Some, like the daughter Bella, eventually wish to hear more about the experiences of her father （while feeling that his words will “ruin” her social life）, while Hayutaand Shifra his danghter-in-law react by shunning the speech of Mendel, which they experience as ruining their quotidian happiness.

Will the Holocaust Please Hush？ Social and Historical Incongruity in Savyon Liebrecht＇s Hayuta＇s Engagement Party

Mendel, a survivor of Auschwitz who lives in Israel, remains silent for forty years after his traumatic experiences. However, Mendel, for no reason that his daughter Bella, also a survivor, can discern, begins to testify to his horrific ordeals during the Holocaust at putatively inopportune times, such as religious holidays and family celebrations. When his granddaughter Hayuta plans an engagement party, the social and historical incongruities of the Holocaust in the context of contemporary Israeli society become apparent. Ordinary pleasures are matters of moral obloquy in the face of the unfathomable black hole of the Holocaust. While critics have charged Mendel＇s daughter with preoccupation with invidious social climbing and his granddaughter Hayuta with moral reprehensible compartmentalization of her historical and familial existences, Liebrecht unwittingly implies that historical trauma has very diverse and inexplicable effects on different family members： Some, like the daughter Bella, eventually wish to hear more about the experiences of her father （while feeling that his words will ＂＇ruin＂ her social life）, while Hayuta and Shifra his daughter-in-law react by shunning the speech of Mendel, which they experience as destroying their quotidian happiness.

基督徒见证的事实、意义与阐释——兼及口述史与宗教研究

对于宗教研究者来说,可能都注意到见证,特别是归信见证在基督徒中特别常见。无论是在具体的地方教会的聚会中,还是在网络论坛中,或是成文作品中,见证都是其中的重要组成部分。事实上,基督教被认为是一种见证式的宗教。因此,见证对于理解基督教非常重要,归信见证则对于理解基督徒的归信原因、过程及机制非常关键。而归信是宗教研究,特别是社会科学进路的宗教研究中的一个核心议题。

Analysis of the testimonial evidence of Portugal's first major forensic case:part Ⅱ

The crime possibly perpetrated by a doctor named Vicente Urbino de Freitas in 1890 is one of the most famous cases of poisoning,and it had echoes in the Portuguese and foreign press for several decades.This prestigious doctor was convicted of the fatal poisoning of his nephew.He also attempted the homicide of two nieces and their mother-in-law,who only escaped because they obstinately refused to comply with the"therapeutics"prescribed by the family doctor.The motive of the crime should have been Vicente Urbino de Freitas'ambition to receive the family inheritance of his wife,the daughter of the well-known mer-chant Jose Antonio Sampaio of Flores Street in Porto.Vicente Urbino de Freitas was con-victed but doubt about his guilt persists for more than a century.This second work aimed to collect and analyse all the relevant and contradictory testimonial evidence of the prosecu-tion and defence witnesses.This case represents an odd historical record obtained through more than 12years of research on the first major significant Portuguese forensic case.Rare and unprecedented testimonial evidence and photographs were obtained from different countries and then repaired,since these also provide an important historical record of the medical photography.

Confrontation Clause after Crawford and its Impact on the Admissibility of Forensic Evidence:A Comparative Study on the United States and China

Crawford is a watershed case separating hearsay exceptions and confrontation.Overruling Roberts,Crawford established a new bright-line test for Confrontation Clause.Testimonial out-of-court statements,whether reliable or not,are inadmissible unless the prosecution has shown:(a)the declarant is unavailable and(b)the defense has a prior opportunity for cross-examination.Applying Crawford's primary purpose test,testimonial out-of-court forensic reports(usually as affidavits)might not be admissible.However,Crawford underlined that the Confrontation Clause has its independent procedural values and other nonepistemic functions.

THE ADMISSIBILITY OF PRE-TRIAL TESTIMONIAL TRANSCRIPTS： A DISCUSSION OF PRACTICE IN CHINA AND IN THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNALS

In Chinese criminal procedure, the issues of illegally obtained evidence and witnesses not appearing in courtroom are under fire, which is partly rooted in the fact that the Chinese courts do not limit the admissibility ofpre-trial testimonial transcripts in judicial practice, zealously pursue the ＂truth of fact＂ while disregard defendant＇s right to confront. Focusing on the admissibility ofpre-trial testimonial transcripts, the article will first analyze the current legislations and judicial practice in China, then from a comparative perspective introduce the corresponding written testimony rules of the International Criminal Tribunal （Court） which distinguishes the admissibility of different categories of written testimony, with an aim of both protecting the criminal defendant＇s right of confrontation and pursuing truth in fact-finding. The practice in International Criminal Tribunal （Court） provides a good starting point for China to rethink its own practice and learn from.