Penney Lewis – författare

The question of whether euthanasia and assisted suicide should be legalized is often treated, by judges and commentators alike, as a universal, ethical question, transcending national boundaries and diverse legal systems. By thinking of the issue in this way, the important context in which individual jurisdictions make decisions about assisted dying and the significance of the legal methods chosen to carry out those decisions is often lost. This book examines the impact of the choice of diverse legal routes towards legalization on the subsequent assisted dying regimes in operation. This examination suggests that greater caution is needed before relying on the experience of one jurisdiction when discussing proposals for regulation of assisted dying in others. The book seeks to demonstrate the need to explore the legal environment in which assisted dying is performed or proposed in order to evaluate the relevance of a particular legal experience to other jurisdictions. The book begins with an examination of the unsuccessful attempts to use constitutionally entrenched human rights claims to challenge criminal prohibitions on assisted suicide which reached the highest courts in the United States, Canada and Europe. Their failure makes legalization through a rights-based claim unlikely in any major common law or European jurisdiction. Alternative routes towards legalization are then discussed, including the defence of necessity, by which euthanasia was effectively legalized in the Netherlands and an approach based on compassion which has been proposed in France, as well as the legislative approaches which have been taken in Oregon, Belgium and the Northern Territory of Australia. All of these approaches are compared in detail, with particular attention paid to the effectiveness and transferability of the ubiquitous slippery slope arguments

Recent years have seen a growing number of criminal prosecutions for sexual offences against children which are alleged to have occurred many years before the time of prosecution. This is a relatively new phenomenon within the criminal justice system. This book examines the response of the criminal justice systems of common law jurisdictions to such challenging cases, and explores how the system should respond in order to ensure that the defendant receives a fair trial, whilst recognizing the reasons why complainants may delay reporting abuse for many years.The book begins with a discussion of the psychological effects of childhood sexual abuse in order to shed light on the reasons why a victim might delay in making a complaint. Two central categories of delay are introduced: those in which the victim always remembered the abuse but was unable to complain; and those in which the victim's memory of the abuse was allegedly lost and later recovered. The debate over whether long-delayed criminal prosecutions should be brought, and the particular concerns raised by delayed childhood sexual abuse cases, are reviewed. Statutory and constitutional limits on the bringing of such cases are canvassed. The common law remedies of abuse of process and prohibition, which can ensure that unfair or oppressive prosecutions do not proceed, are examined.The focus then turns to the trial of delayed childhood sexual abuse allegations, considering the use which can be made by the prosecution and defence of evidence of complaint and delay in complaint, and the methods by which the jury can be informed of the reasons why complainants may delay. The role of warnings to the jury about the absence of corroboration and the forensic disadvantage or prejudice which the defendant may have suffered as a result of the complainant's delay in coming forward is scrutinized. Particular problems raised in cases involving recovered memories, and those involving multiple allegations are analysed. Finally, retrospective assessment of trial fairness and the safety of convictions is considered.The book is multi-jurisdictional in scope, focussing on those common law jurisdictions which have experienced a large number of such prosecutions: England and Wales; Ireland; Canada; Australia; New Zealand and the United States.