1.
Maveety N. The pioneers of judicial behavior [electronic resource]. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 2003.
2.
Sheldon Goldman. Voting Behavior on the United States Courts of Appeals Revisited. The American Political Science Review [Internet]. 1975;69(2):491–506. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1959082
3.
Epstein L, Knight J. A Strategic Account of Judicial Decision-Making. In: The Choices Justices Make. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press; 1998.
4.
Feeley M, Rubin EL. Judicial Policy-Making and the Modern State. Vol. Cambridge criminology series, Judicial Policy-Making and the Modern State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998.
5.
Cameron C, Cummings C. Diversity and Judicial Decision-Making: Evidence from Affirmative Action Cases in the Federal Courts of Appeal 1971-1999.
6.
Review by: Anne Bloom. The ‘Post-Attitudinal Moment’: Judicial Policymaking through the Lens of New Institutionalism. Law & Society Review [Internet]. 2001;35(1):219–30. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3185391
7.
Baum, Lawrence. Judges and their audiences: a perspective on judicial behavior. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press; 2006.
8.
Schauer F. Is There a Psychology of Judging? In: The psychology of judicial decision making [Internet]. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. Available from: https://ucl.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=14455024690004761&institutionId=4761&customerId=4760&VE=true
9.
Sunstein CR. Are Judges Conformists Too? In: Why societies need dissent [Internet]. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press; 2003. Available from: https://www-jstor-org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/stable/j.ctv1pncntj.12
10.
Knight J. Are Empiricists Asking the Right Questions about Judicial Decisionmaking. Duke law journal [Internet]. 2009;58:1531–56. Available from: http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dlj/vol58/iss7/9/
11.
Baum L. Motivation and Judicial Behaviour: Expanding the Scope of Inquiry. In: The psychology of judicial decision making [Internet]. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. Available from: https://ucl.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=14455024690004761&institutionId=4761&customerId=4760&VE=true
12.
Powell, HJ. A RESPONSE TO PROFESSOR KNIGHT, ARE EMPIRICISTS ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS ABOUT JUDICIAL DECISIONMAKING? Available from: http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dlj/vol58/iss7/
13.
Guarnieri, Carlo, Pederzoli, Patrizia, Thomas, C. A., European Secretariat for Scientific Publications. The power of judges: a comparative study of courts and democracy [Internet]. Vol. Oxford socio-legal studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2002. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198298359.001.0001
14.
Guarnieri C, Pederzoli P, Thomas CA. The Judicial System. In: The power of judges: a comparative study of courts and democracy [Internet]. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2002. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198298359.001.0001
15.
Multiple Constraint Satisfaction in Judging. In: The psychology of judicial decision making [Internet]. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. Available from: https://ucl.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=14455024690004761&institutionId=4761&customerId=4760&VE=true
16.
Klein, David E., Mitchell, Gregory. The psychology of judicial decision making [Internet]. Vol. American Psychology-Law Society series. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. Available from: https://doi-org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195367584.001.0001
17.
Vidmar N. A Historical and Comparative Perspective on the Common Law Jury. In: World jury systems [Internet]. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2000. Available from: https://doi-org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198298564.001.0001
18.
Cheryl Thomas. Exposing the myths of jury service. Criminal Law Review [Internet]. 2008;(6):415–30. Available from: https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I11381A7114F711DD9CE4E82430A3B777/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
19.
Thomas C. Are juries fair [Internet]. London%20%3A: Ministry%20of%20Justice%2C; 2010. Available from: http://copac.ac.uk/search?title=Are%20juries%20fair&sort-order=rank&rn=1
20.
Lord Chief Justice. Judges, Tribunals and Magistrates | 2010 | NI Judicial Studies Board Lecture, Belfast: Jury trials [Internet]. Available from: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/speeches/2010/speech-by-lcj-jsb-lecture-jury-trials
21.
Sutton Trust. Research - Sutton Trust [Internet]. Available from: http://www.suttontrust.com/our-work/research/item/law-educational-backgrounds/
22.
Thomas C. Review of Judicial Diversity in the UK and Other Jurisdictions: parts 1 and 2. 2006; Available from: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/judicial-institute/publications.html
23.
Hale B. The Appointment and Removal of Judges: Independence and Diversity. International Association of Women Judges [Internet]. 2006; Available from: http://www.iawj.org/InternationalConferences.html
24.
Genn, Hazel. The attractiveness of senior judicial appointment to highly qualified practitioners: report to the Judicial Executive Board. 2008; Available from: http://copac.ac.uk/search?title=The%20attractiveness%20of%20senior%20judicial%20appointment%20to%20highly%20qualified%20practitioners&sort-order=rank&rn=1
25.
House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution. Judicial Appointments Process - UK Parliament [Internet]. Available from: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/lords-select/constitution-committee/inquiries/judicial-appointments-process/
26.
House of Lords, Select Committee on the Constitution. Judicial Appointments: 25th Report of Session [Internet]. 2010. Available from: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/lords-select/constitution-committee/publications/
27.
Judith R. Judicial Selection and Democratic Theory: Demand, Supply, and Life Tenure. 26 Cardozo Law Review 597 [Internet]. 2005; Available from: http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/759/
28.
Farber D, Sherry S. Building a Better Judiciary. In: The psychology of judicial decision making [Internet]. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. Available from: https://ucl.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=14455024690004761&institutionId=4761&customerId=4760&VE=true
29.
Prashar U. Translating Aspirations into Reality: Establishing the Judicial Appointments Commission. In: Judicial appointments: balancing independence, accountability and legitimacy [Internet]. S.I.: s.n.; 2010. Available from: http://copac.ac.uk/search?title=Judicial%2520Appointments%253A%2520Independence%252C%2520Accountability%2520and%2520Legitimacy&sort-order=rank&rn=1
30.
Sumption J. The Constitutional Reform Act 2005. In: Judicial appointments: balancing independence, accountability and legitimacy [Internet]. S.I.: s.n.; 2010. Available from: http://copac.ac.uk/search?title=Judicial%2520Appointments%253A%2520Independence%252C%2520Accountability%2520and%2520Legitimacy&sort-order=rank&rn=1
31.
Sedley, Stephen. When should a judge not be a judge? London Review of Books [Internet]. 2011 Jan 6; Available from: http://www.lrb.co.uk/contributors/stephen-sedley
32.
Geyh CG. The Dimensions of Judicial Impartiality. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2012;
33.
Wistrich A. Defining Good Judging. In: The psychology of judicial decision making [Internet]. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. Available from: https://ucl.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=14455024690004761&institutionId=4761&customerId=4760&VE=true
34.
Hickinbottom G. What Makes a Good Judge. In: Judicial appointments: balancing independence, accountability and legitimacy [Internet]. S.I.: s.n.; 2010. Available from: http://copac.ac.uk/search?title=Judicial%2520Appointments%253A%2520Balancing&sort-order=rank&rn=1
35.
Sedley S. Judicial Politics. London Review of Books [Internet]. 2012 Feb 23;34(4). Available from: http://www.lrb.co.uk/contributors/stephen-sedley
36.
Sentencing guidelines in England and Wales: an evolutionary approach [Internet]. London: Sentencing Commission Working Group; 2008. Available from: http://copac.jisc.ac.uk/id/1878814?style=html&title=Sentencing%20guidelines%20in%20England%20and%20Walesan%20evolutionary
37.
Roberts JV. Sentencing Guidelines and Judicial Discretion: Evolution of the Duty of Courts to Comply in England and Wales. British Journal of Criminology. 2011 Nov 1;51(6):997–1013.
38.
Jacobson, Jessica. Mitigation: the role of personal factors in sentencing [Internet]. London: Prison Reform Trust; 2007. Available from: http://copac.jisc.ac.uk/id/24551221?style=html&title=Mitigationthe%20role%20of%20personal%20factors%20in%20sentencing
39.
Austin Lovegrove. Public opinion, sentencing and lenience: an empirical study involving judges consulting the community. Criminal Law Review [Internet]. 2007;(Oct):769–81. Available from: https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I393E8AB1529F11DCB2ABCD1148869588/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
40.
Judge SI. The Sentencing Decision. 2005;
41.
Gibb F. Judges fear prisons will burst under new rules. The Times [Internet]. 2010; Available from: http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/nexis/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=7Y08-2FX0-Y9M1-H0N5&csi=10939&oc=00240&perma=true
42.
Callaway E. Justice may be hard-wired into the human brain. New Scientist [Internet]. 2008; Available from: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16256-justice-may-be-hardwired-into-the-human-brain.html#.Umk0Olv1D6U
43.
Judges, Tribunals and Magistrates | 2012 | The Queen (on the application of Tony Nicklinson) -v- Ministry of Justice [Internet]. Available from: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/judgments/2012/tony-nicklinson-judgment-16082012
44.
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division). R. v. Twomey [Internet]. 2009. Available from: https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I72178E105D4011DE87E28F67B42D8222/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
45.
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division). R. v Thompson (Benjamin)R. v Crawford (Jason)R. v Gomulu (Ahmed)R. v Allen (Christopher)R. v Blake (David)R. v Kasunga (Kamulete) [Internet]. Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) | July 14, 2010 | 2010 WL 2754137. 2010. Available from: https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/IB1183210905F11DFA138B71712AA6103/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
46.
Dwoell K. Dinah Rose QC hailed for actions that led her to apologise in torture hearing. Lawyer [Internet]. 2010;24(8). Available from: https://search-ebscohost-com.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=bth&AN=49868416&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s8454451
47.
European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber). Taxquet v Belgium (926/05) [Internet]. 16AD. Available from: https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I6A0C1310836411E1BC298D03BAA33194/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
48.
King’s Bench Division. R. v Sussex Justices Ex p. McCarthy [Internet]. 1924. Available from: http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?docguid=I6D7D1670E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&crumb-action=reset&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
49.
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division). R. v Hughes (Michael) [Internet]. Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) | June 17, 2011 | 2011 WL 883594. 17AD. Available from: https://signon.thomsonreuters.com/federation/UKF?entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&returnto=https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I30DBAEE09D2111E09B45D883AEA2A88A/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true
50.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Binyam Mohamed v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs EWCA Civ 65 [Internet]. R. (on the application of Mohamed) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. 2010. Available from: http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?docguid=IDC00550016C211DF970C9D47B1B6D882&crumb-action=reset&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
51.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Binyam Mohamed v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs(Approved Judgment) EWCA Civ 158 [Internet]. 2010. Available from: http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I7ABDB6D0235511DFB9AA9F265CBD0413&entityID=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth
52.
Norton-Taylor R. Judges ‘irresponsible’ for wanting CIA torture files disclosed. The Guardian [Internet]. 2009; Available from: http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/nexis/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=7X9Y-P7V1-2R54-209J&csi=138620&oc=00240&perma=true
53.
Aston J, Gordon C. Minister’s lawyers attack ‘torture’ case judges The Independent. The Independent [Internet]. 2008; Available from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ministers-lawyers-attack-torture-case-judges-1840649.html
54.
Hirsch ARBIC, Booth R, Cobain I. Government fury after judges attack security services. The Guardian [Internet]. 2010; Available from: http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/nexis/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=7XXC-R5N1-2R54-201V&csi=138620&oc=00240&perma=true
55.
Gibb F. Supreme ambition, jealousy and outrage. The Times [Internet]. 2010; Available from: http://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/nexis/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=7XPT-31W0-Y9M1-H0CN&csi=10939&oc=00240&perma=true
