Travers2017

From emcawiki
Revision as of 04:25, 15 June 2019 by PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Max Travers; |Title=Business as Usual? Bail Decision Making and “Micro Politics” in an Australian Magistrates Court |Tag(s)=EMCA; Le...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Travers2017
BibType ARTICLE
Key Travers2017
Author(s) Max Travers
Title Business as Usual? Bail Decision Making and “Micro Politics” in an Australian Magistrates Court
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Legal discourse, Australia, Criminal justice
Publisher
Year 2017
Language English
City
Month
Journal Law & Social Inquiry
Volume 42
Number 2
Pages
URL
DOI 10.1111/lsi.12264
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

Between the 1970s and 1990s, political scientists in the United States pursued a distinctive research program that employed ethnographic methods to study micro politics in criminal courts. This article considers the relevance of this concept for court researchers today through a case study about bail decision making in a lower criminal court in Australia. It describes business as usual in how decisions are made and the provision of pretrial services. It also looks at how traditionalists and reformers understood business as usual, and uses this as a critical concept to make visible micro politics in this court. The case study raises issues about organizational change in criminal courts since the 1990s, since there are fewer studies about plea bargaining and more about specialist or problem-solving courts. It is suggested that we need a new international agenda that can address change and continuity in criminal courts.

Notes