Could the Presumption of Innocence Protect the Guilty?
- Patrick Tomlin
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
At criminal trial, we demand that those accused of criminal wrongdoing be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. What are the moral and/or political grounds of this demand? One popular and natural answer to this question focuses on the moral badness or wrongness of convicting and punishing innocent persons, which I call the direct moral grounding. In this essay, I suggest that this direct moral grounding, if accepted, may well have important ramifications for other areas of the criminal justice process, and in particular those parts in which we (through our legislatures and judges) decide how much punishment to distribute to guilty persons. If, as the direct moral grounding suggests, we should prefer under-punishment to over-punishment under conditions of uncertainty, due to the moral seriousness of errors which inappropriately punish persons, then we should also prefer erring on the side of under-punishment when considering how much to punish those who may justly be punished. Some objections to this line of thinking are considered.
- Alexander, L (1983) Retributivism and the inadvertent punishment of the innocent. Law and Philosophy 2: pp. 233-246 CrossRef
- Ashworth, A (2000) Is the criminal law a lost cause?. Law Quarterly Review 116: pp. 225-256
- Ashworth, A (2006) Principles of criminal law. Oxford University Press, Oxford
- Blackstone, W (1836) Commentaries on the laws of England. S. Sweet, London
- Bring, J, Aitken, C (1997) Burden of proof and estimation of drug quantities under the federal sentencing guidelines. Cardozo Law Review 18: pp. 1987-1999
- Colyvan, M, Regan, HM, Ferson, S (2001) Is it a crime to belong to a reference class?. Journal of Political Philosophy 9: pp. 168-181 CrossRef
- Duff, RA Strict liability, legal presumptions, and the presumption of innocence. In: Simester, AP eds. (2005) Appraising strict liability. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 125-149 CrossRef
- Hart, H. L. A. (1959–1960). Prolegomenon to the principles of punishment. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 60, 1–26.
- Husak, D (2008) Overcriminalization. Oxford University Press, Oxford
- Laudan, L The rules of trial, political morality, and the costs of error: Or, is proof beyond a reasonable doubt doing more harm than good?. In: Green, L, Leiter, B eds. (2011) Oxford studies in philosophy of law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 195-227 CrossRef
- Rawls, J Two concepts of rules. In: Rawls, J eds. (2001) Collected papers. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 20-46
- Roberts, P Strict liability and the presumption of innocence: An exposé of functionalist assumptions. In: Simester, AP eds. (2005) Appraising strict liability. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 151-194 CrossRef
- Roebuck, G, Wood, D (2011) A retributive argument against punishment. Criminal Law and Philosophy 5: pp. 73-86 CrossRef
- Simester, AP, Sullivan, GR (2003) Criminal law: Theory and doctrine. Hart, Oxford
- Tadros, V (2007) Rethinking the presumption of innocence. Criminal Law and Philosophy 1: pp. 193-213 CrossRef
- Tadros, V (2011) The ends of harm. Oxford University Press, Oxford
- Tadros, V, Tierney, S (2004) The presumption of innocence and the human rights act. Modern Law Review 67: pp. 402-434 CrossRef
- Tomlin, P. (forthcoming). Extending the golden thread? Criminalisation and the presumption of innocence. Journal of Political Philosophy. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2011.00411.x.
- Tribe, L (1970) An ounce of detention: preventive justice in the world of John Mitchell. Virginia Law Review 56: pp. 371-407 CrossRef
- Wellman, CH (2012) The rights forfeiture theory of punishment. Ethics 122: pp. 371-393 CrossRef
- Could the Presumption of Innocence Protect the Guilty?
Criminal Law and Philosophy
Volume 8, Issue 2 , pp 431-447
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Presumption of innocence
- Standard of proof
- Industry Sectors
- Patrick Tomlin (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Reading, Whiteknights, Reading, RG6 6AA, UK