Data from two 1979 potential juror surveys concerning three criminal cases in Yolo County, California, form the basis for an analysis of opinions indicative of prejudgment in those cases. Strong bivariate relationships are demonstrated between knowledge about a specific case, general attitudes on crime, gender, and education level, on the one hand, and two measures of propensity to prejudge a defendant's guilt, on the other. Further, multivariate discriminant function analysis is used to show that these four independent variables taken together are able to produce significant increases in the ability to make predictions of prejudging opinions on the part of the respondents and that knowledge about a specific case is by far the most important variable in determining such predictions.

Neo-Marxian critiques of Max Weber's theory of rationality have stressed the ideological role of legal formalism. At the analytic level, however, Weber's theory points to sources of potential conflict between legal formalism and economic rationality. This paper critically reconstructs Weber's perspective for analyzing the boundary maintaining categories of legal discourse. A case study of the 1971 federal loan guarantee to Lockheed Aircraft Corporation demonstrates that while both market ideologies and administrative principles partially bounded the debate over the legislation, this debate did not resolve the question of which businesses should potentially receive government support. This substantive issue raised problems of legal particularism that undermined the universal claims of legal rationality and required an expansion of boundary categories beyond legal formalism, yielding a more economically and politically open discourse.

A description and analysis of the Columbus (Ohio) Municipal Court is presented in the context of comparison with Malcolm Feeley's recent study of the New Haven lower court. The findings suggest that the Columbus court is much more severe in the sanctions imposed upon convicted defendants. These differences are attributed, in part, to contrasting local political cultures whose influence upon courts is mediated by police department orientations, police-prosecutor relationships, and methods of judicial assignment.

This paper is a replication of the analysis undertaken in 1978 by James Q. Wilson and Barbara Boland. We use time-series data for nine cities for portions of the period 1948-1978 to test the effect of aggressive policing on the robbery rate. Contrary to Wilson and Boland, we do not find moving violations to be a useful indicator of police aggressiveness. We also conclude that using the arrest/offense ratio introduces artifactual negative correlations. When one examines police expenditures, the size of the police force, the arrest rate, and the concentration of the police on robbery arrests, one generally finds positive relationships rather than negative ones. We interpret these results to indicate that a focus on the problem of robbery by the police leads the police both to make more arrests and to record more offenses, thus producing the positive correlations we found.

This article addresses the role of quantitative evidence and methods in trials. Major arguments against the introduction of explicit computation information are considered and contrasted with findings about the characteristics of the unaided human decision maker. Emphasis is given to behavioral decision theory and the heuristic biases it reveals. Consideration is given to the symbolic versus “truth-finding” functions of trials, mathematical models (especially linear) of decision making, advocacy tactics that follow from what has been learned about how humans process information, the diagnostic value of aggregate probabilities, the notion of particularistic proof, and the evaluation of witness credibility. We conclude that unaided human decision making embodies certain normal and lawful errors, and that the exclusion of mathematical guides to aid a fact finder, while avoiding some problems, exposes the fact-finding process to the heuristic biases of intuitive decision making.

A conception of corporate behavior as criminal has entered the scientific and popular vocabulary. This has been accompanied by an expansion of common law to include the activities of corporations. The definitional change is exemplified by the indictment and trial of Ford Motor Company on charges of reckless homicide. The present work focuses on the history of events surrounding this precedent action. Using information from media accounts, it explores the definitional processes by which the world's second largest automobile manufacturer was indicted as criminal. Content analysis of these reports suggests that the expansion of legal parameters to include formerly exempt behavior was preceded by the development of a vocabulary of deviance, personalization of harm, and attributions of nonrepentance to the offender. Public reevaluation of corporate actors and actions in terms of a vocabulary previously reserved for conventional criminality, the transformation of the definition from one of product defect and diffuse consumer cost to one of personal injury, and depiction of the corporation as refusing to recognize the harms associated with its acts, it is argued, opened the way to the application of criminal statutes.

I. THE PERSON

Leon Petrażycki (1861-1931), a legal theorist and sociologist, came from the Polish gentry of the Witebsk area, a territory historically Polish, but then—and now—a part of Russia. After preliminary studies as a medical student, he turned to the study of law at the universities in Kiev, St. Petersburg, Heidelberg, Berlin, Paris, and London. He received a master's degree in Roman Law from the University of Kiev and a doctorate in Law from the University of St. Petersburg. In 1897 Petrażycki became a professor at the University of St. Petersburg; he was quickly promoted to the rank of full professor and subsequently appointed Dean of the Faculty of Law—the first, in Russia, to be democratically elected to that position. He became a Member of the Russian Parliament (DUMA) and later spent some time in prison as a result of his political activities. During his twenty years in St. Petersburg, Petrażycki published several books on such subjects as political economy, private international law, civil law, psychology, and matters dealing with the relation between law, morals, and the state. Many of these books (written in Russian) were controversial and stimulated much discussion and response in Russia. A brief bibliography is contained in Appendix A.