A Response to Four Readings of A Theory of the Trial

Abstract

My goal in A Theory of the Trial was a "rational reconstruction" of the American trial. I began with the conviction that the trial is, in some sense, a successful enterprise. The evidence for this proposition is spread throughout the book and is basically of three sorts-testimony of those who are experienced participant observers, social scientific findings, and the very account of the trial provided in the book. The latter contributes an argument that the trial's "consciously structured hybrid" of languages and practices is consistent with, indeed effectively realizes, intellectual and moral resources that interpret "our considered judgments of justice" (Rawls 1971, 19-20). Robert P. Bums is professor of law, Northwestern University School of Law. I much appreciate the decision of the editors of Law & Social Inquiry to publish this exchange. The authors bring an imposing range of learning to their insightful readings of my book, critique in the best sense of the word. I am especially grateful to Marianne Constable for organizing and introducing the discussion.