The Ontario Legal Philosophy Partnership (OLPP), which聽celebrates its founding with a launch reception聽on Friday, May 13 in the Great Hall of McMaster鈥檚 University Club, is the brainchild of three internationally recognized legal philosophy professors who will be the partnership鈥檚 administrators. (Osgoode); Michael Giudice (91亚色 Philosophy); and Wil Waluchow (McMaster Philosophy and the聽Senator William McMaster Chair in Constitutional Studies) are the brain trust behind the partnership.

Above: From left, OLPP founders and administrators Michael Giudice (91亚色), Wil Waluchow (McMaster) and Fran莽ois Tanguay-Renaud (Osgoode)

"Through the OLPP, Osgoode, as well as McMaster's and 91亚色's departments of philosophy confirm their status as international leaders in legal philosophy and associated dimensions of political and moral philosophy,鈥� said Tanguay-Renaud, co-director with Giudice of the new combined Juris Doctor/Master of Arts in Philosophy (JD/MA) program offered by Osgoode and 91亚色鈥檚 philosophy department, and acting director of the at Osgoode.

鈥淭his collective effort, which builds on solid pre-existing relations between the partners, promises to enable new ambitious research collaborations and grant applications, allow for the development of cutting-edge opportunities for our JD and graduate students, and project even further the partners' already well-established reputations in the field."

Tanguay-Renaud said the OLPP formalizes existing links between the three partners that have become increasingly solid and fruitful since the beginning of the millennium.

鈥淭he OLPP will create even further opportunities for each institution and their students,鈥� said Tanguay-Renaud, noting that it has already helped to inspire and dynamize the Nathanson Centre鈥檚 Legal Philosophy between State and Transnationalism international seminar series, Osgoode鈥檚 鈥橭r 鈥橢met annual public lecture, the Transnational Legal Theory Journal, the McMaster visiting speakers series, Osgoode鈥檚 recent criminal law theory international conference, and other prominent legal philosophy initiatives at McMaster and 91亚色.

The OLPP鈥檚 latest initiative sees McMaster鈥檚 philosophy department, under the leadership of Waluchow and fellow OLPP member Professor Stefan Sciaraffa, hosting an international conference on 鈥淭he Nature of Law: Contemporary Perspectives鈥澛燤ay 11 to 15, with most of the biggest names in general analytical jurisprudence present.

The OLPP, which is also composed of a large contingent of faculty members from the three partner institutions, will be strongly represented in the conference program with Giudice delivering one of the keynote addresses. One of Osgoode鈥檚 newest hires, Professor l (hired from the University of Warwick in the UK), and Distinguished Research Professor (now serving as acting dean of 91亚色鈥檚 Faculty of Graduate Studies) will also be presenting papers.

Suzanne Crosta, dean of McMaster鈥檚 Faculty of Humanities, and Osgoode Hall Law School Dean both have high praise for the OLPP. 鈥淲e look forward with great anticipation to the rich intellectual synergies that will result from the new partnership,鈥� Crosta said.

鈥淭he partnership brings together internationally recognized scholars to explore a shared passion for the philosophy of law and will provide a unique experience for the law and philosophy graduate students involved,鈥� noted Sossin.

What鈥檚 more, Brian Leiter, professor of law and philosophy at the University of Chicago and one of the most eminent legal philosophers of our day, has written glowingly about the OLPP on his philosophy . "This will be of interest to students of legal philosophy, involving 91亚色, Toronto (and its law school, Osgoode) and McMaster University," writes Leiter,聽聽"which, together, comprise probably the strongest legal philosophy cohort in Canada and one of the best ones in North America."

For more information, visit the聽 website.

Republished courtesy of YFile 鈥� 91亚色鈥檚 daily e-bulletin.

The post Three-way legal philosophy partnership between Osgoode, 91亚色 and McMaster promises new research collaborations appeared first on Research & Innovation.

Last September, Justice Susan Himel of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice struck down three provisions in Canada's Criminal Code: living off the avails of prostitution; keeping a common bawdy house; and communicating in a public place for the purpose of engaging in prostitution, , in a series examining the local sex trade:

鈥淭hese laws," wrote Justice Himel, "individually and together, force prostitutes to choose between their liberty interest and their right to security of the person as protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms." It was hailed as a breakthrough by those in the sex trade.

Until, that is, the federal and provincial governments appealed. A decision is expected this spring.

. . .

For , the 91亚色 law professor [at聽Osgoode Hall Law School] who represented one of the sex workers in the superior court case, the communication section is "the least important aspect of the case."

"It was always about bawdy house," said Young. "The idea was to provide the safe house, a safe place to work. If anything is achieved by the case it's that. I also don't like living off the avails because it's overly broad."

In his years of fighting legal battles on behalf of sex workers, Young said he's discovered a flourishing underground economy 鈥� "you'd be surprised at some of these little businesses," he said 鈥� but even he doesn't have a handle on the number of workers across the country.

"Nobody knows," he said. "It's a very ill-defined profession."

Around the time of the fall ruling, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said prostitution was "bad for society."

Young describes the federal government's appeal of the ruling as "knee-jerk" and "ideologically driven." He's outspoken in his hope that by the time the ruling is given, the current government will have lost a spring election.

91亚色 Research covered Young's involvement in the ; Osgoode Hall students also in the ruling.

Posted by Elizabeth Monier-Williams, research communications officer, with files courtesy of YFile 鈥� 91亚色鈥檚 daily e-bulletin.

The post Professor Alan Young calls appeal of prostitution-decriminalization ruling 鈥榢nee-jerk鈥� appeared first on Research & Innovation.

The students, who are supervised by Innocence Project Director and Professor (left), filed an application last April asking that the Crown be compelled to retain all murder exhibits unless an inmate has approved their destruction or a court order has been obtained to authorize the destruction.

According to Young, the application was driven by frustration that the Innocence Project had 鈥渢o abandon a lot of cases due to the inability of the state to locate or find the evidence needed for us to reinvestigate.鈥�

Ontario Superior Court Judge Edward Belobaba ruled earlier this month that the Innocence Project鈥檚 application 鈥� launched in the name of Amina Chaudhary, 46, who is serving a life sentence for the Feb. 3, 1982 murder of eight-year-old Rajesh Gupta 鈥� was too broad and unmanageable. However, the judge did not throw out the constitutional challenge as the federal government had requested. Instead, he said the challenge can proceed if it is scaled down and pertains only to evidence in murder cases. Next step for the Innocence Project will be to amend the statement of claim in the case, which will likely be heard next year.

Young credits then second-year Osgoode students Ashley Audet, Kathleen Beahen and Leila Mehkeri with doing the research last year for the original application. 鈥淭hey chronicled all the problems and the various preservation of evidence policies in Canada,鈥� Young said. 鈥淚n April, before the school term ended, we completed the work and we filed.鈥�

This year, second-year JD students Noah Schachter and Genevieve Trickey were responsible for responding to the government鈥檚 motion to strike the claim. 鈥淭hey prepared the factum pretty much on their own with very little guidance from me,鈥� Young said.

鈥淚f we win this case, it will not only be a victory for the Innocence Project, but governments will have to come up with a more unified and comprehensive regime of evidence preservation for all types of offences," says聽Young. "Right now every police force, every court house and every lab maintains their own policies about preservation of evidence. Nobody works together; the left hand doesn鈥檛 know what the right hand is doing.鈥�

Republished courtesy of YFile鈥� 91亚色鈥檚 daily e-bulletin

The post Student-driven Innocence Project behind preservation of evidence challenge appeared first on Research & Innovation.

It鈥檚 a hotly debated question in the legal community, as the courts decide whether a Toronto sexual assault complainant will be allowed to wear a niqab while testifying.

, adjunct professor in 91亚色鈥檚 , also practises criminal law. 鈥淚t鈥檚 dangerous to rely on demeanour alone,鈥� he says, especially if there are cultural differences involved. We tend to overestimate our ability to detect lies through facial cues, he says.

Litkowski cites a 2007 case from the Ontario Court of Appeal, in which 鈥渁 conviction was overturned because the trial judge failed to take into account cultural differences that affect demeanour.鈥� Namely, eye contact. The judge mistook a lack of eye contact for the passivity of the witness, who was born and raised in Sudan, where eye contact is perceived differently.

Instincts can be an occupational hazard of the legal profession and have led to wrongful convictions. 鈥淢ost trial lawyers have faith in their ability to take note of physical cues they perceive as they give evidence,鈥� Litkowski says.

The complete article is posted on the .

Posted by Elizabeth Monier-Williams, research communications officer, with files courtesy of YFile鈥� 91亚色鈥檚 daily e-bulletin.

The post Professor Richard Litkowski on telling truth from lies: Dangerous to rely on demeanour alone appeared first on Research & Innovation.

DNA evidence is popularized in cop and legal dramas as proof of irrefutable guilt, but it's only as solid as the conditions under which it is collected. , professor of criminal law in 91亚色's Osgoode Hall Law School,聽 was featured in a on the dark side of DNA evidence on March 13:

Last year, University of Virginia law Professor Brandon Garrett and Peter Neufeld, co-founder of the Innocence Project, found that three of 156 US individuals ultimately exonerated in serious crimes had been wrongly convicted because of DNA errors. In one case, a technician grossly overstated evidence. Another featured lab contamination. The third wrongful conviction came after senior analyst Fred Zain gave evidence in court he knew to be false.

Alan Young, a criminal law professor in 91亚色鈥檚 Osgoode Hall Law School, describes the Zain case as 鈥渁 classic example of why you can鈥檛 simply roll over and play dead in the face of science.鈥� After his shortcomings at the West聽 Virginia State Police Crime Laboratory were discovered, Zain left and became head of a medical examiner鈥檚 lab in Texas. His errors became one of several problems the state ultimately faced.

鈥淭hey have had to reopen hundreds of cases in Texas because of the discovery of horrible preservation and contamination issues,鈥� said Young. 鈥淭hey had to literally shut down a lab in Houston because it was generating so many false results.鈥�

The full article is available on The Globe & Mail's .

Republished with files courtesy of YFile 鈥� 91亚色鈥檚 daily e-bulletin.

The post The dark side of DNA evidence appeared first on Research & Innovation.