ORCID Profile
0000-0001-5530-021X
Current Organisations
University of Technology Sydney
,
Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 14-07-2018
Publisher: Bristol University Press
Date: 05-2020
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 2007
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 17-06-2015
Publisher: Onati International Institute for the Sociology of Law
Date: 14-05-2019
DOI: 10.35295/OSLS.IISL/0000-0000-0000-1037
Abstract: Enquiries and research reveal that many victims of family violence who are personally cross-examined by the alleged perpetrator of that violence in family law proceedings find the process traumatising and intimidating. Not only can such processes generate unsafe and unfair outcomes but also they are unlikely to produce the high quality evidence required by the court. In deference to the emotional wellbeing and vulnerability of these victims, a number of measures for receiving such evidence are available to Australian Family Court judges. However, currently these are all discretionary powers and anecdotal evidence suggests that the use of these tools is unpredictable and dependent on the in idual judge. In the absence of empirical evidence, this paper aims to open up potential emotional dimensions of judicial decision-making in this context with a view to exploring these theoretical ideas in later empirical work. Investigaciones revelan que muchas víctimas de violencia doméstica que, en el curso de procedimientos en tribunales de derecho de familia, son sometidas a contrainterrogatorios por parte del supuesto autor de esa violencia consideran ese proceso traumatizante e intimidatorio. Esos procesos no sólo pueden arrojar resultados inseguros e injustos, sino que también tienen pocas probabilidades de producir el material probatorio de calidad que requiere un tribunal. Por deferencia al bienestar emocional y a la vulnerabilidad de esas víctimas, los jueces de familia de Australia tienen a su disposición varias medidas para obtener esas pruebas sin embargo, actualmente, son sólo poderes discrecionales, y pruebas circunstanciales sugieren que su uso es impredecible y dependiente de cada juez. En ausencia de pruebas empíricas, este artículo intenta abrir una dimensión emocional potencial de la toma de decisiones judiciales en este contexto, con miras a explorar esas ideas teóricas en trabajos empíricos posteriores.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 24-04-2020
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 2023
Abstract: There is increasing recognition that many lawyers, regardless of their practice area, will represent people who have both used and experienced violence in their intimate relationships. This suggests that being informed about domestic and family violence (DFV) is an important attribute of competent lawyering. Despite repeated reports and research drawing attention to poor practices, many lawyers lack DFV training. There is limited research about what it means to be a ‘good’ DFV lawyer. To explore this, we conducted focus groups with lawyers employed in specialist women’s legal services in Australia. Much work undertaken in these services involves working with clients who have experienced DFV, so these lawyers are well placed to identify features of ‘good’ DFV lawyering. The attributes for competent lawyering with people who have experienced DFV, include being knowledgeable about DFV, being trauma-informed/responsive, being knowledgeable about the law and the relevance of violence, adopting a safety lens and providing a holistic service. Our study identifies a number of areas that require further research including understanding the difference between DFV-informed lawyering and trauma-informed/responsive lawyering, and whether specific competencies are required when representing people who experience DFV or have used DFV. Despite years of research and various inquiries pointing to inadequacies and making recommendations for improvement, this article draws attention to continuing gaps in this area.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 07-2009
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 02-10-2019
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 18-07-2012
Abstract: Victim participation in the sentencing hearing by way of oral victim impact statements (VISs) is a contentious aspect of contemporary criminal justice. A particular concern is that the disjuncture between the legal goals of the sentencing hearing on the one hand and the goals of victims on the other can generate tension and conflict in the courtroom and threaten the integrity of the process. The subject of this article is the management and containment of victim participation in 18 sentencing hearings observed in the NSW Supreme Court. It is argued that various cooling out structures and processes effectively managed and contained the emotional tension in the courtroom as well as assisted victims to adjust to the legal constraints and the compromise inherent in their position in the process.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 2013
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 12-2011
Publisher: University of New South Wales Law Journal
Date: 09-2019
DOI: 10.53637/BFVQ4347
Abstract: Since the early 2000s, the ability of a self-represented litigant alleged to have used domestic and family violence including sexual violence to personally cross-examine the alleged victim of that violence has been steadily restricted or prohibited across the Australian jurisdictions. These statutory limitations recognise the traumatic and negative impact such personal cross-examination can have on the alleged victim. All Australian jurisdictions restrict such personal cross-examination in sexual offence proceedings. Many jurisdictions also impose similar limitations in proceedings for other domestic and family violence related criminal proceedings and civil protection order proceedings. This article reveals a marked unevenness in protection for alleged victims both across and within jurisdictions. The lack of consistency in approach and lack of uniformity in provisions across the jurisdictions means that not all victims of domestic and family violence are protected, and for those who are, the nature and extent of those protections differ.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 09-02-2018
DOI: 10.1093/BJC/AZY001
Publisher: University of New South Wales Law Journal
Date: 13-12-2022
DOI: 10.53637/FFZV1456
Location: Brazil
No related grants have been discovered for Tracey Booth.