Justice In-Between

Reviews / Votes

[The book] puts [intermediate verdicts] on the table and gives them the attention they deserve. The account is rigorously argued, rooted in an understanding of criminal procedure and, without doubt, provides food for thought to those who have never questioned the binary verdict system. * Modern Law Review * Justice In-Between is a highly accomplished book. It is rigorously argued and - unlike some theoretical contributions on this subject - is rooted in an understanding of criminal procedure (...) There is much to admire in Justice In-Between (...) [O]ne of the key strengths of the book is that it is not a work of pure philosophy. It makes a proposal with practical utility, grounded in the reality of the justice system. * Fiona Leverick, The Edinburgh Law Review * Federico Picinali opens his excellent Justice In-Between with a puzzle about criminal trials and intermediate options (...) One significant contribution of Picinali's book is that he truly follows through on the implications of the expected utility approach to criminal trials. Perhaps he is more thorough in this than any of the other theorists who have endorsed this approach. * Martin Smith, The Edinburgh Law Review * Justice In-Between is an impressive and timely book. Its provocative arguments have much to offer a Scottish readership as the criminal process faces a radical redesign, and the abolition of not proven remains a very real possibility. The book is expertly crafted, and refreshing in paying close and fair minded attention to positions other than its own. Despite the theoretical reservations expressed here (...) there is much to be gained by following Picinali's lead in questioning the binary conception of innocence and guilt which most jurisdictions adopt. * Gabrielle Watson, The Edinburgh Law Review * The final verdict on this book? (...) Evidence law and penal theorists will be the most receptive, and those already working within the decision-theoretic paradigm will perhaps extract the greatest value from this systematic, rigorous and unconventional application. * Paul Roberts, University of Nottingham, School of Law *