*Please note that the links to the content in this Part will direct you to Westlaw AU.<\/p>\n
To purchase an article, please email: LTA.Service@thomsonreuters.com<\/a> or contact us on 1300 304 195 (Australian customers) or +61 2 8587 7980 (international customers) during business hours (Mon-Fri, 8am-6pm AST).<\/p>\n The latest issue of the Criminal Law Journal <\/em>(Volume 41 Part 3) contains the following material:<\/p>\n EDITORIAL<\/a><\/p>\n Reconsidering Pre-trial Questioning as a Measure to Address Prejudicial Pre-trial Publicity in Victoria <\/strong><\/em><\/a>\u00e2\u20ac\u201c Anna Belgiorno-Nettis<\/p>\n As media content continues to proliferate, pre-trial publicity\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s potential to negatively impact jury impartiality and decrease the certainty of a fair trial is an ever-increasing concern. In 1995, Queensland became the first Australian State or Territory to implement pre-trial questioning as a measure to address such publicity. In 2014, the Victorian Law Reform Commission (VLRC) determined that Victoria did not require such questioning. This article extends the VLRC\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s analysis to suggest that the Queensland \u00e2\u20ac\u201c as opposed to United States \u00e2\u20ac\u201c version of pre-trial questioning can, in fact, have an important role in addressing the challenge that prejudicial pre-trial publicity poses to courts. The article reviews the reasons for which the VLRC rejected the measure to conclude that, to address prejudicial pre-trial publicity in trials with much contemporary media coverage, Queensland\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s pre-trial questioning has a particular effectiveness that the measures which Victoria currently uses do not have.<\/p>\n Accommodating Impairments in Empathy in the Sentencing of Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder <\/strong><\/em><\/a>\u00e2\u20ac\u201c Joanna Connolly<\/p>\n Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is associated with deficits in social cognition and empathy. In the criminal context, this poses difficult challenges, undermining assumptions about a defendant\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s culpability and character and forcing recognition of the impact of social and emotional impairments on decision-making. Drawing on relevant court decisions, this article examines the sentencing response to defendants with ASD. It argues that the condition is raising unique challenges for sentencing judges as ASD\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s distinct symptomology is difficult to fit within conventional exculpatory doctrines. It urges awareness of the distinct forensic aspects of ASD, so that courts can appreciate the subtle and often counterintuitive elements of this condition and their relevance to the sentencing process.<\/p>\n CONTEMPORARY COMMENT<\/a><\/p>\n BOOK REVIEW<\/a><\/p>\n DIGEST OF CRIMINAL LAW CASES<\/a><\/p>\n For the PDF\u00c2\u00a0version of the table of contents, click here: Crim LJ Vol 41 No 3 Contents<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n
Articles<\/h3>\n
\n
\n