Skip to main content
Retaliation Doctrine: Promoting Forensic Misconduct
Albany Law Review (1985)
  • Martin H. Belsky, University of Akron School of Law

This Article will discuss the type of forensic misconduct encountered in United States v. Young - improper closing arguments in criminal cases. Attempts to control such misconduct have been limited by the legal profession's acceptance of the "sporting theory of justice and its "trial by combat" response" to the actions of trial counsel. This combative philosophy has produced the "retaliation" or "invited response" doctrine, hereinafter referred to simply as the "retaliation doctrine." In accordance with this doctrine, courts have accepted this "eye for an eye" approach and excused courtroom misconduct instead of enforcing rules which control and limit such misbehavior.

  • ethics,
  • ethical rules,
  • courtroom behavior
Publication Date
Citation Information
Martin H. Belsky, Retaliation Doctrine: Promoting Forensic Misconduct, 50 Albany Law Review 763 (1985).