191,99 €
inkl. MwSt.
Versandkostenfrei*
Versandfertig in über 4 Wochen
payback
96 °P sammeln
  • Gebundenes Buch

This collection explores the stakes, risks and opportunities invoked in opening and exploring law's archive and re-examining law's evidence. It draws together work exploring how evidence is used or mis-used during the legal process, and re-used after the law's work has concluded by engaging with ethical, aesthetic or emotional dimensions of using law's evidence.

Produktbeschreibung
This collection explores the stakes, risks and opportunities invoked in opening and exploring law's archive and re-examining law's evidence. It draws together work exploring how evidence is used or mis-used during the legal process, and re-used after the law's work has concluded by engaging with ethical, aesthetic or emotional dimensions of using law's evidence.
Hinweis: Dieser Artikel kann nur an eine deutsche Lieferadresse ausgeliefert werden.
Autorenporträt
Katherine Biber is a legal scholar, historian and criminologist and Professor of Law at the University of Technology Sydney. She researches in the field of evidence, criminal procedure, visual culture and documentation. She is author of Captive Images: Race, Crime, Photography (2007) and the forthcoming In Crime¿s Archive: The Cultural Afterlife of Evidence (2017). She is co-editor of The Lindy Chamberlain Case: Nation, Law, Memory (2009), and an editor of the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Crime, Media and Popular Culture (forthcoming). Trish Luker is based in the Faculty of Law, University of Technology Sydney. Her research focus is in interdisciplinary studies of law and the humanities, particularly in relation to documentary practices and evidence law. She is a co-editor of Australian Feminist Judgments: Righting and Rewriting Law (2014). She is currently working on a project entitled `The Court as Archive: Rethinking the Institutional Role of Federal Courts of Record¿. During 2016, together with Katherine Biber, she will begin a project entitled `What is a Document? Evidentiary Challenges in the Digital Age¿.