• Complain

Delafontaine - Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice

Here you can read online Delafontaine - Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice full text of the book (entire story) in english for free. Download pdf and epub, get meaning, cover and reviews about this ebook. year: 2015, publisher: Springer International Publishing, Cham, genre: Romance novel. Description of the work, (preface) as well as reviews are available. Best literature library LitArk.com created for fans of good reading and offers a wide selection of genres:

Romance novel Science fiction Adventure Detective Science History Home and family Prose Art Politics Computer Non-fiction Religion Business Children Humor

Choose a favorite category and find really read worthwhile books. Enjoy immersion in the world of imagination, feel the emotions of the characters or learn something new for yourself, make an fascinating discovery.

Delafontaine Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice
  • Book:
    Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice
  • Author:
  • Publisher:
    Springer International Publishing, Cham
  • Genre:
  • Year:
    2015
  • Rating:
    3 / 5
  • Favourites:
    Add to favourites
  • Your mark:
    • 60
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5

Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice: summary, description and annotation

We offer to read an annotation, description, summary or preface (depends on what the author of the book "Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice" wrote himself). If you haven't found the necessary information about the book — write in the comments, we will try to find it.

Historian Ramses Delafontaine presents an engaging examination of a controversial legal practice: the historian as an expert judicial witness. This book focuses on tobacco litigation in the U.S. wherein 50 historians have witnessed in 314 court cases from 1986 to 2014. The author examines the use of historical arguments in court and investigates how a legal context influences historical narratives and discourse in forensic history. Delafontaine asserts that the courtroom is a performative and fact-making theatre. Nonetheless, he argues that the civic responsibility of the historian should not end at the threshold of the courtroom where history and truth hang in the balance.

The book is divided into three parts featuring an impressive range of European and American case studies. The first part provides a theoretical framework on the issues which arise when history and law interact. The second part gives a comparative overview of European and American examples of forensic history. This part also reviews U.S. legal rules and case law on expert evidence, as well as extralegal challenges historians face as experts. The third part covers a series of tobacco-related trials. With remunerations as high as hundreds of thousands of dollars and no peer-reviewed publications or communication on the part of the historians hired by the tobacco companies the question arises whether some historians are willing to trade their reputation and that of their university for the benefit of an interested party. The book further provides 50 expert profiles of the historians active in tobacco litigation, lists detailing the manner of the experts involvement, and West Law references to these cases.

This book offers profound and thought-provoking insights on the post-war forensification of history from an interdisciplinary perspective. In this way, Delafontaine makes a stirring call for debate on the contemporary engagement of historians as expert judicial witnesses in U.S. tobacco litigation.

Delafontaine: author's other books


Who wrote Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice? Find out the surname, the name of the author of the book and a list of all author's works by series.

Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice — read online for free the complete book (whole text) full work

Below is the text of the book, divided by pages. System saving the place of the last page read, allows you to conveniently read the book "Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice" online for free, without having to search again every time where you left off. Put a bookmark, and you can go to the page where you finished reading at any time.

Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make
Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015
Ramses Delafontaine Historians as Expert Judicial Witnesses in Tobacco Litigation Studies in the History of Law and Justice 10.1007/978-3-319-14292-0_1
1. General Introduction
Ramses Delafontaine 1
(1)
FWO Fellow at Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
Abstract
In this general introduction to the book I lay out the three-part structure of my research of historians serving as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation. The first part introduces the concept of Clios Modern Paradox and the issues it implies for historians in court. The second part gives a general introduction to forensic history. By discussing several European and American examples I revaluate the term forensic history as conceived by Alain Wijffels. In the third part of the book I present the results of my research on the involvement of historians in tobacco litigation in the United States of America.
We are like dwarves standing on the shoulders of giants. We see more and farther than our predecessors, not because of the acuteness of our sight or the stature of our body, but because we are carried aloft and elevated by the magnitude of giants.
Bernard de Chartres
The title of this book indicates an ambitious project: I will make a historical inquiry into the controversial legal practice wherein historians testify as expert witnesses in court. The book has been constructed in three parts in order to deliver respectively a theoretical framework, a comparative overview of European and American litigation, and a systematical analysis of the historian as an expert witness in tobacco-related court cases in the United States of America. The first part constructs a theoretical framework of the relationship between history and law as a basic background for the other two parts of this book. The second part discusses the European and American experience of expert witnessing. The third and final part aims to give an overview of the involvement of historians in tobacco-related litigation, through a systematic analysis based on a qualitative as well as a quantitative approach. My research also aims to discuss and present the courtroom as a performative and fact-making theatre. As a conclusion, I redefine the forensification of history.
History and law go back a long way. While on the one hand, the disciplines of history and law are considered similar, they are on the other hand also considered distinctly different. Furthermore, although the connection between the two exists; it is considered an illicit one by legal scholars as well as historians. During the second half of the twentieth century, historians have served in court as expert witnesses in five main categories of forensic historical practice. (1) Historians have been active in the transnational justice movement, which is based on the legal models by which the tribunals of Nuremberg and Tokyo were organized. (2) Furthermore, historians have appeared as expert witnesses in post-World War II and post-Holocaust trials. (3) The third category in which historians have testified is comprised of Holocaust denial trials. (4) In Commonwealth countries, historians have been called upon to testify in indigenous peoples-related litigation. (5) In addition, historians have testified at an exponential rate in US civil litigation.
Although historians testify in court at an increasing rate, the legal profession has its doubt on their involvement. There are plenty of theories on this incompatibility. I have called this incongruity, with on the one hand the popularity of the past, and on the other hand the social legitimacy problem of the historical discipline, Clios Modern Paradox. In the first part of this book I identify three key developments that have contributed to the creation of Clios Modern Paradox. The first part of this book serves as a theoretical framework for part II and III, which are empirical inquiries of historians working as expert judicial witnesses. Explaining Clios Modern Paradox is imperative to understand the prejudice, that exists within the legal profession and with the general public which historians have to face in court.
The second part of my research compares the European and American experience of forensic history. The first chapter discusses examples of interactions between law and history that are often wrongfully defined as types of expert witnessing, such as the Dreyfus affair, the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals, and amicus curiae briefs. Thereafter, I review the European experience with historians as expert witnesses in court. I examine the Eichmann trial, the German post-Holocaust trials, the French Vichy trials, and the Holocaust denial trials of Zndel and Irving. These interactions of history and law have played a dominant role in shaping the preconceptions among historians and legal scholars on the incompatibility of history and law. Most European cases are very political and polemic and have called the appearance of historians as experts into question. Yet, there are also examples of a fruitful interaction, for example the Ludwigsburg paradigm. I contrast these European examples with American civil litigation, where historians have been involved in a wide range of cases. Similar to the European examples, historians and lawyers tend to remember the problematic examples of expert witnessing, and forget that the interaction does work in other instances. I discuss Brown v. Board of Education , the Sears case, and a lead paint toxic tort case. In addition, I present a practical guide to expert witnessing, which gives a unique and systematic overview of the consecutive steps expert witnesses go through before testifying in court. Addressing and comparing problems identified in both European and American litigation-driven history allows me to reassess the proposal by legal historian Alain Wijffels to limit the involvement of the historian to that of a historical fact provider for the court and not that of an opinionated witness. I will argue, in contrast to Wijffels, that it is essential that historians can testify in court when engaging in forensic history.
The last and third part of the book seeks to provide an analysis of one genre of US civil litigation in which historians have been particularly active, namely tobacco litigation. In order to come to conclusions that are not based on anecdotal evidence, I conduct a four-part analysis of the involvement of historians in tobacco litigation: (1) What do historians testify on? (2) When have they testified in court? (3) How have they presented their research results in court? (4) Who were the historians who were and are active in tobacco litigation? By analysing these four elements I come to a systematic overview of the involvement of historians in tobacco litigation. I strengthen the examination of these four elements with a qualitative and quantitative analysis. The qualitative approach focuses on the records of the trial experience of five historians in the landmark case US v. Philip Morris et al.. In conclusion of this qualitative analysis, I argue that the courtroom is a performative and fact-making theatre. My quantitative analysis has produced a list of 50 historians who have been active in 314 cases of tobacco litigation. After confronting the behaviour of these five expert witnesses with the code of ethics proposed by Belgian historian Antoon De Baets and after finding throughout my quantitative research that very few expertsand mostly those in service of the plaintiffshave openly discussed their involvement in tobacco litigation; I identified transparency as the biggest problem with the involvement of historians in tobacco litigation. Because, as we speak [October, 2014], there are historians testifying in tobacco cases, I argue that reflection on their involvement is of an acute nature. I have made an attempt at contributing to that debate by making 50 witness profiles of these historians and their involvement in tobacco litigation freely accessible online.
Next page
Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make

Similar books «Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice»

Look at similar books to Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice. We have selected literature similar in name and meaning in the hope of providing readers with more options to find new, interesting, not yet read works.


Reviews about «Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice»

Discussion, reviews of the book Historians as expert judicial witnesses in tobacco litigation : a controversial legal practice and just readers' own opinions. Leave your comments, write what you think about the work, its meaning or the main characters. Specify what exactly you liked and what you didn't like, and why you think so.