But while this line of argument remains widespread in general surveys of the Crusades and the Latin East, recent scholarship has significantly expanded our knowledge concerning intellectual activities undertaken in Outremer. Thus, to mention just several important examples, Kedar explored the exchanges in the sphere of learning between Franks and Oriental Christians, and Minervini studied the production and circulation of manuscripts as well as translation activities. In his work on the knightly culture of Outremer, David Jacoby also touched related issues, and several articles have been devoted to intellectual activities undertaken in specific cities in the Latin East.

In November 2022, Curtis James Jackson, Aubrey Drake Graham, and 100 other hip-hop artists signed an open letter on change.org, “Art on Trial: Protect Black Art,” denouncing the use of defendant-authored rap lyrics as evidence in criminal trials. The petition was a direct response to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s public announcement that her office would seek to admit the rap lyrics of Jeffery Lamar Williams (a.k.a. Young Thug) as proof of criminal intent in his RICO prosecution.

In 2011, David Cesar Coronado was charged in Dallas County, Texas with severely injuring his five-month-old child. Critical to the case against him was the testimony of Dr. Robert Williams, a dentist and odontologist who testified that alleged bitemarks found on the child matched Mr. Coronado’s teeth. Prior to trial, Mr. Coronado sought to exclude Dr. Williams’s testimony arguing that bitemark analysis is unreliable. The judge overseeing the case held a hearing to consider the issue, but denied Mr. Coronado’s request.

Since at least 1989, prosecutors have sought to use rap music evidence to convict defendants. To date, nearly 700 cases involving this practice have been identified from commercial databases, media reports, and word-of-mouth. Cases exist in virtually every state and in both federal and state courts. Over time, “rap music evidence” has evolved to include not just lyrics and songs handwritten on paper but also recorded songs, videos, photographs, hand signs, and fashion choices. As technology has advanced, evidence now may be found online or offline.

Persistent poverty and economic inequality are features of American society. In turn, they shape people’s engagement with the legal system. People experiencing poverty end up in housing court facing evictions, in criminal court facing charges for crimes of desperation, in small claims court facing debt collection, and in family court facing removal of their children. Yet the rules of evidence generally erase the facts of poverty and social class in trials. Sometimes this is salutary by removing the prejudice a party can face simply for being poor in a supposed meritocracy. Yet it is impossible to “erase” the bias poor people can face in court because their social class is obvious through other cues. Moreover, the relevance rules exacerbate the effects of poverty by masking economic injustice and thereby dampening calls for collective action.

Some thirty years ago, in the face of strong opposition, including from the National Organization for Women (NOW), Congress amended the Federal Rules of Evidence to add Rules 413–15. A significant number of states have followed. Contrary to the “cardinal” rule of precluding admission of prior bad acts evidence to prove a person’s propensity to commit such an act, Rules 413 to 415 explicitly permit admission of evidence of prior sexual assault (413 and 415) and child molestation (414 and 415) for the propensity inference.

The process of researching, planning and writing a persuasive essay is a fundamental task in the study of law. A well-planned and well-executed essay shows that you have knowledge and that you can apply that knowledge persuasively in relation to an argument. This form of assessment is used less often in the law than in other humanities subjects, but the skills you obtain by becoming proficient at this sort of writing will certainly assist you in any type of endeavour which requires you to form coherent arguments. Remember that the key to the whole process is to do the preparatory work before you begin writing. An essay with a strong underlying structure is almost certainly going to be a strong essay. Where an essay has been written by a student who has not taken the time to plan, this will, unfortunately, be obvious to the marker, and will result in lower grades every time. Understand the topic, develop your one-sentence answer to the question, plan the structure, add your research – and you will write an excellent essay.

Considers what the book covers and what it does not. Provides historiographical context about food cultures among the enslaved, many of which focused on what people ate, whether they were “well-fed” and “Mammies” within domestic spaces. Instead, this book centers everyday routines of food distribution, preparation, and consumption among the enslaved, stressing the vital role played by women who cooked for the quarters within slavery’s wider capitalistic development. Explores Black feminist epistemologies offering alternative methodologies where archival evidence is lacking. Questions dominant modes of feminist thinking. Rather than defining homes and kitchens as prisons, they can be refuges from a racist outside world, a “homeplace.” Examines the duality of cooking as a monotonous chore and an expression of love, and the key concept of “othermothering.” Explains how I utilize the terms “nurses” and “age” and my contribution to methodological discussions of primary sources, including WPA narratives, published autobiographies, travel accounts, enslavers’ records (especially postbellum), and archaeological evidence. Elaborates on regionality and temporality within the research.

Discusses the importance of prioritizing evidence from the formerly enslaved, while using a multiplicity of primary evidence, especially when researching highly unequal and complex systems such as slavery. It stresses the dominance, for too long, of the records of powerful enslavers within slavery’s history. Considers how the context of the 1930s influenced the comments of the WPA respondents about cooking and eating while enslaved. Some interviewees had nostalgia for food in the past, while others continued to provision in a manner akin to slavery, conveying longer-run continuities of oppression. Addresses longer-term and rising food inequalities within the United States and their implications, drawing on the writings of other historians and activists. A lack of adequate, nutritious food choices began in slavery. People in poorer neighborhoods more likely to live in “food deserts” and to suffer from poorer health outcomes. Summarizes the book’s interventions into the histories of feminism, slavery’s capitalistic machinations, and how historians can deploy primary evidence in ways that seek to overcome archival absences. Cooks in the quarters, while exploited, should be celebrated.

This chapter begins by introducing the resolution of employment-related disputes at international organizations – by examining the first ever formal example of this, involving an international civil servant employed by the League of Nations. Second, the general legal principles of reviewing employment-related disputes at international organizations are identified, namely: (1) Only adverse administrative decisions may be contested; (2) Deference is owed discretionary authority; and (3) Arbitrariness invalidates authority. Third, three general legal principles of evidence utilized by international administrative tribunals are considered, namely: (1) Claimants must establish arbitrariness; (2) Unreasoned administrative decisions are evidently arbitrary; and (3) Administrative decisions cannot be based upon withheld evidence. Fourth, and in conclusion, the legal basis of employment-related dispute resolution at international organizations is restated.

Chapter 3 asks what is counted and who comes to count in the enactment of epidemiological knowledge. It explores the presence and absence of injury in statistics, blood, chromosomes, memory, and radiation records, and asks how those exposed to toxic environmental harm experience and evaluate epidemiological accounts of their health. It also examines how scientists who use epidemiological reasoning in toxic exposure studies understand and enact the ethics of their practice. It charts how test veterans grappled with the troubling evidentiary burdens of exposure upon which claim-making depends. In attempting to contest accounts of ‘safe’ radiation exposure embedded within government records, test veterans condemned some epidemiological studies and praised others. ‘Good’ numbers were emergent if they were temporally responsive, appropriately connected and detached from study subjects, separable from the state’s influence, epistemically humble, future focused, and contextualized within the practices of their production. ‘Bad’ numbers, by contrast, were those that perpetuated and exacerbated the injuries they denied.

The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination is the oldest UN human rights treaty, and for over forty years, the Committee overseeing its implementation, CERD, has had the power to decide individual communications. Despite this long history, a settled evidentiary framework has not materialised yet. The Committee rarely discussed evidence, and when it did, the results could differ markedly: In Dawas and Shava v. Denmark (2012), a case on mob violence, the Committee did not directly engage with the evidence, which led to a resurfacing of evidentiary questions during the follow-up phase, when they could no longer be addressed. Far preferable is the approach adopted in Zapescu v. Moldova (2021), dealing with discriminatory employment practices, where the Committee discussed the standard of proof for procedural violations and the necessary evidence. More elaborations of this kind are needed for a clear evidentiary pathway to emerge.

This introductory chapter illustrates why evidence in the individual communications procedure of the United Nations human rights treaty bodies (UNTB) is an issue requiring reflection and clarification. The chapter firstly contextualises this central topic of this book by broadly introducing the UNTBs’ mandates, composition and ways of working, as well as some general features of their individual communications procedures. Indications are given of how this legal, institutional and procedural setting interacts with the handling of evidence by the UNTBs, as well as some of the key questions it raises. The chapter further outlines some of the particular research challenges encountered in tackling the questions at the heart of this book, and how they have been addressed. It then goes on to introduce the four-part structure of the book and its ten chapters, including the final chapter, containing recommendations. Finally, this introduction discusses cross-cutting themes which emerge from the contributions.

This chapter reviews the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention’s (WGAD) approach to issues of evidence and burdens of proof. It aims to provide a useful point of comparison with the UNTBs’ evidentiary procedures. The WGAD has developed an increasingly sophisticated approach to evidence, providing strong incentives for other decision-making bodies to take up its conclusions and procedures. In this chapter, the following arguments are substantiated: first, that the Working Group’s increasingly formalised and standardised approach to evidence reflects the maturing of the Working Group and its entrenchment in the ecosystem of human rights bodies; second, that its nuanced evidentiary approach can serve to enhance its credibility with states and claimants, in order to increase compliance rates; and third, its detailed approaches to evidentiary standards and challenges could provide precedents for UNTBs with individual claims mandates to follow a similar approach.

The concept of ‘stereotypes’ refers to generalisations that are made about the behaviour adopted and/or the characteristics possessed by the members of a particular group. Involving presumptions about human actions and attributes, a stereotype provides ready-made narratives as to how and why some events unfold as they do. Thus, stereotypes, especially when they operate ‘undetected’, hamper an objective analysis of the factual situation. In the courtroom, they tend to have a polluting effect on the assessment of evidence, leading to relevant pieces of evidence being ignored, irrelevant circumstances being given weight, and higher standards of proof being imposed than would have been the case in their absence. This chapter focuses on the approach of the CEDAW Committee in examining the impact of gender stereotypes on the evaluation of evidence performed by domestic courts. It provides an in-depth analysis of the views adopted by the Committee in selected individual communications.