The So-Called “Cultural Defense” in the United States
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Defendants charged with breaking the law and brought before the courts in America’s multicultural society occasionally attempt to offer evidence of their cultural backgrounds in their defense. A strong difference of opinion characterizes scholarship on whether cultural variation should be admissible in the criminal justice system, and to what extent, and while some judges have allowed it, most have not. Proponents of the “cultural defense” include multiculturalists who assert that in an increasingly pluralistic society, fairness requires that the criminal justice system be individualized to moderate the strict application of the law. Opponents who oppose the multiculturalism argument in general, support the admission of cultural evidence on due process grounds. Many observers decry the success of the cultural defense in a number of shocking brutal and tragic crimes against particularly women and child victims. On occasion the cultural defense arises when a person who is raised in a foreign society commits a criminal act because they are not aware of the laws in the host country. More often an apparently law-abiding person raised in a foreign culture commits a criminal act in a host country because of being compelled to do so by the unique values that are native to the person’s culture, with the evidence being presented to rebut an element of the crime charged. This author concludes that because a cultural defense law undermines the need for deterrence and violates the principle of equal protection, an independent cultural defense ought not to be recognized, but culture should remain admissible to either rebut an element of the crime charged, such as the required mens rea, or when offered in support of one of the traditional criminal law defenses.
Abstract
Defendants charged with breaking the law and brought before the courts in America’s multicultural society occasionally attempt to offer evidence of their cultural backgrounds in their defense. A strong difference of opinion characterizes scholarship on whether cultural variation should be admissible in the criminal justice system, and to what extent, and while some judges have allowed it, most have not. Proponents of the “cultural defense” include multiculturalists who assert that in an increasingly pluralistic society, fairness requires that the criminal justice system be individualized to moderate the strict application of the law. Opponents who oppose the multiculturalism argument in general, support the admission of cultural evidence on due process grounds. Many observers decry the success of the cultural defense in a number of shocking brutal and tragic crimes against particularly women and child victims. On occasion the cultural defense arises when a person who is raised in a foreign society commits a criminal act because they are not aware of the laws in the host country. More often an apparently law-abiding person raised in a foreign culture commits a criminal act in a host country because of being compelled to do so by the unique values that are native to the person’s culture, with the evidence being presented to rebut an element of the crime charged. This author concludes that because a cultural defense law undermines the need for deterrence and violates the principle of equal protection, an independent cultural defense ought not to be recognized, but culture should remain admissible to either rebut an element of the crime charged, such as the required mens rea, or when offered in support of one of the traditional criminal law defenses.
참고문헌 (31)
- Alison Dundes Renteln, "The Cultural Defense" (2004)
- Cynthia Lee, "Murder and the Reasonable Man: Passion and Fear in the Criminal Courtroom" (2003)
- Daniel Webster, "The Works of Daniel Webster Vol.6" (1851)
- Max Gluckman, "The Judicial Process Among the Barotse of Northern Rhodesia" (1967)
- William A. Haviland, "Anthropology" (1989)
- Alison Dundes Renteln, "A Justification of the Cultural Defense as Partial Excuse", Southern California Review of Law & Women's Studies, 2 (1993)
- Carolyn Choi, "Application of a Cultural Defense in Criminal Proceedings", UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal, 8 (1990)
- Cynthia Lee, "Cultural Convergence: Interest Convergence Theory Meets the Cultural Defense", Arizona Law Review, 49 (2007)
- Dan N. Kahan, "Ignorance of Law is an Excuse–But Only for the Virtuous", Michigan Law Review, 127(96), pp.1997~1998 (1997)
- Deirdre Evans-Pritchard, "The Interpretation and Distortion of Culture: A Hmong “marriage By Capture” Case in Fresno, California", Southern California Interdiciplinary Law Journal, 4 (1994)
- Doriane Lambert Coleman, "Individualizing Justice Through Multiculturalism: the Liberals’ Dilemma", Columbia Law Review, 96 (1996)
- Suicide and the Unconscious in Japan, "Douglas Berger", ~
- Elaine M. Chiu, "Culture as Justification, Not Excuse", American Criminal Law Review, 43 (2006)
- Eliot M. Held, "On the Boundaries of Culture as an Affirmative Defense", Arizona Law Review, 51 (2009)
- Elizabeth Martin, "All Men are (Or Should Be) Created Equal: An Argument Against the Use of the Cultural Defense in a Post-Booker World", William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, 15 (2007)
- Frederick G. McKean, "The Presumption of Legal Knowledge", Saint Louis Law Review, ~ (1927)
- Guy Ben-David, "Legal Models for the Recognition of Cultural Arguments in Criminal Law: A Normative Viewpoint", University of Miami Race & Social Justice Law Review, 2 (2012)
- James M. Donovan, "Delimiting the Culture Defense", Quinnipiac Law Review, 26 (2007)
- Janet C. Hoeffel, "Deconstructing the Cultural Evidence Debate", University of Florida Journal of Law & Public Policy, 17 (2006)
- John Alan Cohan, "Honor Killings and the Cultural Defense", California Western International Law Journal, 40 (2010)
- Kent Greenawalt, "the Cultural Defense: Reflections in Light of the Model Penal Code and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act", Ohio State Journal Criminal Law, 6 (2008)
- Leti Volpp, "(Mis)Identifying Culture: Asian Women and the “Cultural Defense”", Harvard Women’s Law Journal, 17 (1994)
- Linda Friedman Ramirez, "The Virtues of the Cultural Defense", Judicature, 92 (2008)
- Melissa Spatz, "“Lesser” Crime: A Comparative Study of Legal Defenses for Men Who Kill Their Wives", Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, 24 (1991)
- Michael Fisher, "Note, The Human Rights Implications of a “Cultural Defense”", Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal, 6 (1998)
- Nancy S. Kim, "The Cultural Defense and the Problem of Cultural Preemption: A Framework for Analysis", New Mexico Law Review, 27 (1997)
- Nilda Rimonte, "A Question of Culture: Cultural Approval of Violence Against Women in the Pacific-Asian Community and the Cultural Defense", Stanford Law Review, 43 (1991)
- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., "The Path of the Law", Harvard Law Review, 10 (1897)
- Sam Beyea, "Cultural Pluralism in Criminal Defense: An Inner Conflict of the Liberal Paradigm", Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal, 12 (2014)
- Stanislaw Pomorski, "On Multiculturalism, Concepts of Crime, and the “De Minimis” Defense", Brigham Young University Law Review, ~ (1997)
- Valerie L. Sacks, "An Indefensible Defense: on the Misuse of Culture in Criminal Law", Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, 13 (1996)