This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1206331208325600v1 12/2/183    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Scheffer, T. Articles by Kozin, A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

How Courts Know: Comparing English Crown Court, U.S.–American State Court, and German District Court

Freie Universität Berlin

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: scheffer{at}law -in-action.org.

	Abstract

To grasp criminal courts as truth spots, one needs to go beyond their symbolic applications to consider their interactional and epistemic implications. In this study, the authors compare the English Crown Court, German District Court, and U.S. State Court as "places on display" and as "places denied." These perspectives comment on the courts in light of their different interaction orders and their different positions in knowledge processes. For the latter, the authors utilize Knorr’s taxonomy of laboratory–experiment relations. The article arrives at one basic distinction: the procedural replacement of trial hearings by deal-oriented plea bargaining in the U.S. context. In contrast, the English and the German courts involve a preference for trial hearings and for fully developed cases, which, however, does not forbid but encourage forms of trial-oriented plea bargain.

First published on October 31, 2008, doi:10.1177/1206331208325600

Space and Culture 2009;12:183.

A more recent version of this article appeared on May 1, 2009


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?