發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 9 年前

關於A useful place之翻譯文章

請翻譯下列文章

A useful place to begin is with the generallegal status of childhood. Historically there was no certain distinctionbetween the treatment of adults and that of children in the law. However, incommon law the rebuttal presumption of doliincapax involved the presumption that a child under 14 was ‘not capable ofcrime’ in the absence of clear and positive evidence from the prosecution thata child understood the wrongfulness of an action. From the seventeenth century anage of criminal responsibility of 7 emerged in English law which entailed aconclusive presumption that no child under the age of 7 could be guilty of anyoffence. In 1933 the Children and YoungPersons Act (s. 50) rained the age of criminal responsibility to 8; it alsodefined a ‘child’ as a person aged below 14 years, and a ‘young person’ as aged14-17, and the measures were repeated in Scotland by the Children and Young Person (Scotland) Act 1937. In England, Walesand Northern Ireland the age of criminal responsibility was later rained to 10 bythe Children and Young Person Act 1963(s.16.1),but remained unchanged at 8 in Scotland.

請不要隨便翻譯

1 個解答

評分
  • 9 年前
    最佳解答

    一個有用的地方開始是童年的一般的法律地位。歷史上法律沒有某些治療成人與兒童之間的區別。然而,doliincapax 反駁推定涉及以下 14 個孩子在沒有明確和積極的證據,從起訴 theta 子是 '不能犯罪' 推定的法律的共同理解的不法性行動。7 的刑事責任年齡從十七世紀出現了英國的法律,這可以帶來不可推翻的推定 7 歲的兒童不可能犯任何罪行。在 1933 年的兒童和青年法 》 (s.50) 雨 8 ; 刑事責任年齡它還定義了一個 '孩子' 作為一個人歲以下 14 年,並作為 aged14-17 '少年人' 和措施兒童和青年的人 (蘇格蘭) 法 》 1937年重複在蘇格蘭。在英格蘭、 威爾士和北愛爾蘭刑事責任的年齡是以後到 10 的兒童和年輕人人 1963 年 (s.16.1) 》 下了雨,但在蘇格蘭 8 維持不變。

還有問題?馬上發問,尋求解答。