Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T21:34:36.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - The Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of the Spanish Jury

from Part I - Advances in Lay Participation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 August 2021

By
Mar Jimeno-Bulnes
Edited by
Sanja Kutnjak Ivković ,
Shari Seidman Diamond ,
Valerie P. Hans  and
Nancy S. Marder
Sanja Kutnjak Ivković
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Shari Seidman Diamond
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Illinois
Valerie P. Hans
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Nancy S. Marder
Affiliation:
Chicago-Kent College of Law
Get access

Summary

A quarter-century has elapsed since the introduction of the Jury Law (Ley del Jurado) in Spain in 1995. This chapter describes trial by jury and its functioning over this period and also considers its chances for survival in the future. The chapter begins with the main features of the Spanish jury and includes changes to the Spanish judicial system after the introduction of jurors. This chapter also provides an overview of the current state of jury trials in Spain, including new statistics and judicial practices. Controversial and high-profile jury trials illustrate some of the strengths and weaknesses of the jury’s performance in Spain over the past 25 years.

Keywords

lay participationcriminal procedurejury trialreasoned verdictSpanish juryhigh-profile jury trials
Type
Chapter
Information
Juries, Lay Judges, and Mixed Courts
A Global Perspective
 , pp. 107 - 128
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Belloch Julbe, J. A. (2000). La ley del jurado [The jury law]. Revista Vasca de Derecho Procesal y Arbitraje, 12, 323–333.Google Scholar
Bermúdez Requena, J. M. (1998). La objeción de conciencia y el jurado [Conscientious objection and the jury]. Actualidad Penal, 27, 489–498.Google Scholar
Blom-Cooper, L. (2019). Unreasoned verdict: The jury’s out. Oxford: Bloomsbury.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgos Ladrón de Guevara, J. (1997). La institución del jurado en España: Delimitación constitucional y legal [The institution of the jury in Spain: Constitutional and legal limits]. Justicia, 3–4, 1127–1140.Google Scholar
Campaner Muñoz, J. (2019). Publicidad y secreto del proceso penal en la sociedad de la información [Publicity and secrecy of criminal proceedings in the information society]. Madrid: Dykinson.Google Scholar
Cano Barrero, J. (2007). La ley del jurado: Jurisprudencia comentada. Diez años de la aplicción de la ley del jurado [The Jury Law: Annotated jurisprudence. Ten years of the application of the Jury Law]. Cizur Menor, Spain: Aranzadi.Google Scholar
Casanovas Romeu, P. (1997). Pragmática de las decisiones judiciales: Diferencias de razonamiento y lenguaje ante el jurado [Pragmatics of judicial decisions: Differences in reasoning and language before the jury]. In Bayo Delgado, J (Ed.), Lenguaje judicial [Legal language] (pp. 109–142). Madrid: Consejo General del Poder Judicial.Google Scholar
Casanovas Romeu, P.(1999). Intervención de las partes en el proceso de selección y designación de los jurados: Atención a los criterios de decisión de los candidatos; estrategias de comunicación [Involvement of the parties in the process of selection and appointment of jurors: Attention to the criteria for deciding on candidates; communication strategies]. In Ministerio de Justicia (Ed.), Estudios jurídicos: Cuerpo de secretarios judiciales V-1999 [Legal studies: The group of court clerks V-1999] (pp. 383–400). Madrid: Centro de Estudios de la Administración de Justicia.Google Scholar
Coen, M., & Doak, J. (2017). Embedding explained jury verdicts in the English criminal trial. Legal Studies, 37, 786–806.Google Scholar
Consejo General del Poder Judicial [General Council of the Judiciary Branch (Spain)] reports. (1998, 1999, & 2015). www.poderjudicial.es/cgpj/es/Temas/Estadistica-Judicial/Estadistica-por-temas/Actividad-de-los-organos-judicialesGoogle Scholar
Constitución Española, aprobada por las Cortes el 31 de octubre de 1978 [Spanish Constitution, approved by the Courts on October 31, 1978]. www.congreso.es/constitucion/ficheros/c78/cons_ingl.pdfGoogle Scholar
Daly, T. (2010). An endangered species? The future of the Irish criminal jury system in light of Taxquet v. Belgium. Irish Criminal Law Journal, 20, 34–43.Google Scholar
De la Cuadra, B. (2003, March 15). El Tribunal Supremo ordena que un nuevo jurado sentencie sobre la muerte de Rocío Wanninkhof [Supreme Court orders new jury to rule on Rocio Wanninkhof’s death]. El País. https://elpais.com/diario/2003/03/15/espana/1047682808_850215.htmlGoogle Scholar
De Paul Velasco, P. (1993a). De la composición y del veredicto del jurado: Comentarios psicológicos al Anteproyecto de Ley del Jurado [Of the composition and verdict of the jury: Psychological comments on the Jury Law’s draft bill]. Jueces para la democracia, 20, 84–86.Google Scholar
De Paul Velasco, P.(1993b). Factores extralegales que influyen en la toma de decisiones de los miembros del jurado [Extra-legal factors influencing jury members’ decision-making]. Cuadernos de Política Criminal, 50, 657–666.Google Scholar
De Vega Ruiz, J. A. (1989). El jurado y el juez ordinario y predeterminado por la ley [The jury and the ordinary judge, predetermined by law]. La Ley, 3, 899–908.Google Scholar
Devine, D. J., Olafson, K. M., Jarvis, L. L., Bott, J. P., Clayton, L. D., & Wolfe, J. (2004). Explaining jury verdicts: Is leniency bias for real? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 2069–2098.Google Scholar
Domingo Monforte, J., Sala Paños, D., Gil Gimeno, C., & Calvo Pellicer, S. (2018). Triada y triage de cuestiones problemáticas en el juicio con tribunal de jurado [Triad and triage of problematic issues in the jury trial]. Diario La Ley, 9142. http://diariolaley.laley.esGoogle Scholar
Esparza Leibar, I. (1995). El jurado en los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica: Problemática general. El procedimiento de selección [The jury in the United States of America: General issues. The selection process]. Revista de Derecho Procesal, 1, 295–311.Google Scholar
Esparza Leibar, I.(2000). Algunas cuestiones sobre el veredicto en la ley del jurado [Some questions about the verdict in jury law]. Revista Tribunales de Justicia, 4, 451–460.Google Scholar
Fairén Guillén, V. (1997). Sobre la “proposición no de ley” para la reforma de la Ley orgánica del Tribunal del Jurado, de 11 de marzo de 1997 [On the “non-legislative proposal” (bill draft) for the reform of the Organic Law on the Jury Court, of March 11, 1997]. Revista de Derecho Procesal, 3, 695–744.Google Scholar
Ferrer Ortiz, J. (2003). La objeción de conciencia al jurado [Conscientious objection to the jury]. Revista General de Derecho Canónico y Derecho Eclesiástico del Estado, 2. www.iustel.comGoogle Scholar
Fidalgo Gallardo, C. (1998). La intimidación de los jurados [The intimidation of jurors]. Justicia, 1–2, 171–276.Google Scholar
Fiscalía General del Estado [General Attorney’s Government Office (Spain)] reports. (2019). www.fiscal.es/documentaciónGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, G. (1996). Las víctimas ante el jurado [The victims before the jury]. (Spanish edition). Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch. (Original work, With Justice for Some: Victims’ Rights in Criminal Trials, published 1995).Google Scholar
Forest, E. (1997). ¿Proceso al jurado?: conversaciones con Miguel Castells [Jury trial: conversations with Miguel Castells]. Hondarribia, Spain: Hiru D. L.Google Scholar
Garcimartín Montero, R. (2018). La inclusion de las personas con discapacidad en el Tribunal del Jurado: Un análisis a la luz de la reforma de la LO 1/2017, de 13 de diciembre [The inclusion of people with disabilities in the Jury Court: An analysis in the light of the reform of LO 1/2017 of December 13]. San Sebastián: Instituto Vasco de Derecho Procesal.Google Scholar
Gimeno Sendra, V. (2015). Manual de derecho procesal penal [Handbook of criminal procedure law]. Madrid: Castillo de Luna Ediciones Jurídicas.Google Scholar
Gleadow, C. (2000). History of trial by jury in the Spanish legal system. Lewinston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
Gómez Colomer, J. L. (1996). El proceso penal especial ante el tribunal del jurado [The special criminal procedure before the jury court]. Madrid, Spain: Civitas.Google Scholar
Grande, E. (2016). Rumba justice and the Spanish jury trial. In Ross, J. E. & Thaman, S. C. (Eds.), Comparative criminal procedure (pp. 365–395). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Groscup, J. L. (2019). The impact of legally relevant media exposure on criminal juror decision-making. In Najdowski, C. J. & Stevenson, M. C. (Eds.), Criminal juries in the 21st century (pp. 133–154). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hans, V. P. (2002). US jury reform: The active jury and the adversarial ideal. Saint Louis University Public Law Review, 21, 85–97.Google Scholar
Hans, V. P.(2012). What difference does a jury make? Yonsei Law Journal, 3, 37–54.Google Scholar
Hastie, R., Penrod, S. D., & Pennington, N. (1986). La institución del jurado en los Estados Unidos: Sus intimidades [The institution of the jury in the United States: Its intimacies]. (Spanish edition.) Madrid: Civitas. (Original work, Inside the Jury, published 1983.)Google Scholar
Hendler, E. S. (2006). El juicio por jurados: Significados, genealogías, incógnitas [The trial by jury: Significance, genealogies, unknowns]. Buenos Aires: Editores del Puerto.Google Scholar
Hernández, J. A. (2000, February 4). El escándalo del caso Otegi [The scandal of the Otegi case]. El País. https://elpais.com/diario/2000/02/04/sociedad/949618802_850215.htmlGoogle Scholar
Igartúa Salaverria, J. (1998). El jurado y la motivación de su veredicto (A propósito de la STS sobre el “caso Otegi”) [The jury and the reasons for its verdict (About STS on the “Otegi case”)]. Revista vasca de Administración Pública, 51, 215–235.Google Scholar
Igartúa Salaverria, J.(2004). El caso Wanninkhof ¿un tiro de gracia al jurado? [The Wanninkhof case: A coup de grace to the jury?] Jueces para la democracia, 50, 63–74.Google Scholar
Jimeno-Bulnes, M. (1993). El principio de publicidad en el sumario [The principle of publicity in pretrial instruction]. Justicia, 3–4, 645–717.Google Scholar
Jimeno-Bulnes, M.(2001). La institución del jurado en el Reino Unido y el régimen especial de Irlanda del Norte [The institution of the jury in the United Kingdom and the special regime in Northern Ireland]. Revista de Derecho Procesal, 1–3, 343–404.Google Scholar
Jimeno-Bulnes, M.(2004). Lay participation in Spain: The jury system. International Criminal Justice Review, 14, 164–185.Google Scholar
Jimeno-Bulnes, M.(2007). A different story line for 12 Angry Men: Verdicts reached by majority rule – The Spanish perspective. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 82, 759–775.Google Scholar
Jimeno-Bulnes, M.(2011). Jury selection and jury trial in Spain: Between theory and practice. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 86, 585–611.Google Scholar
Jimeno-Bulnes, M.(2013). American criminal procedure in a European context. Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law, 21, 409–459.Google Scholar
Jimeno-Bulnes, M.(2014). Un ejemplo emblemático de juicio por Jurado en España: “El caso Gürtel” [An emblematic example of trial by jury in Spain: “The Gürtel case”]. Revista Vasca de Derecho Procesal y Arbitraje, 26, 1–26.Google Scholar
Jimeno-Bulnes, M., & Hans, V. P. (2016). Legal interpreter for the jury: Role of the clerk of the court in Spain. Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 6, 197–615.Google Scholar
Kalven, H., Jr., & Zeisel, H. (1966). The American jury. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.Google Scholar
Kutnjak Ivković, S. (2003). An inside view: Professional judges’ and lay judges’ support for mixed tribunals. Law & Policy, 25, 93–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kutnjak Ivković, S.(2015). Ears of the deaf: The theory and reality of lay judges in mixed tribunals. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 90, 1031–1067.Google Scholar
Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal, Real Decreto de 14 de septiembre de 1882 [Criminal Procedure Act (Spain), Royal Decree, of September 14, 1882]. English version updated October 6, 2015. www.mjusticia.gob.es/cs/Satellite/Portal/es/servicios-ciudadano/documentacion-publicaciones/publicaciones/traducciones-derecho-espanolGoogle Scholar
Ley Orgánica 5/1995, de 22 de mayo, del Tribunal del Jurado [Organic Law 5/1995, of May 22, on the Jury (Spain)]. www.mjusticia.gob.es/cs/Satellite/Portal/es/servicios-ciudadano/documentacion-publicaciones/publicaciones/traducciones-derecho-espanolGoogle Scholar
Lorca Navarrete, A. M. (2003). La deliberación del Jurado en la declaración del hecho probado y proclamación de la culpabilidad e inculpabilidad del acusado en la doctrina y en la reciente jurisprudencia [The deliberation of the jury in declaring the proven facts and proclaiming the guilt or innocence of the accused in doctrine and recent jurisprudence]. La Ley, 2, 1413–1420.Google Scholar
Lorca Navarrete, A. M.(2005). Décimo aniversario de la ley del jurado (1995–2005) [Tenth anniversary of the Jury Act (1995–2005)]. Revista Vasca de Derecho Procesal y Arbitraje, 17, 1–130.Google Scholar
Lorca Navarrete, A. M.(2012). El veredicto del jurado [The jury’s verdict]. San Sebastián: Instituto Vasco de Derecho Procesal.Google Scholar
Marder, N. S. (1987). Gender dynamics and jury deliberations. Yale Law Journal, 96, 593–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marder, N. S.(2005). The jury process. New York: Foundation Press.Google Scholar
Marder, N. S.(2006). Bringing jury instructions into the twenty-first century. Notre Dame Law Review, 81, 449–512.Google Scholar
Marder, N. S.(2009). From “practical obscurity” to web disclosure: A new understanding of public information. Syracuse Law Review, 59, 441–457.Google Scholar
Marder, N. S.(2012). The conundrum of cameras in the courtroom. Arizona State Law Journal, 44, 1489–1574.Google Scholar
Marder, N. S. (2015). Juror bias, voir dire, and the judge–jury relationship. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 90, 927–956.Google Scholar
Martín Ostos, J. (1990). Jurado y escabinado (participación popular en la administración de justicia) [Jury and mixed court (popular participation in the administration of justice)]. Madrid: Dykinson & Instituto Vasco de Derecho Procesal.Google Scholar
Martín Pallín, J. A. (2006). La ley del jurado en su X aniversario [The law of the jury on its tenth anniversary]. Cizur Menor, Spain: Aranzadi.Google Scholar
Martínez Torrón, J. (1996). Ley del jurado y objeción de conciencia [The law of the jury and conscientious objection]. Revista Española de Derecho Constitucional, 48, 119–143.Google Scholar
Montero Aroca, J. (1998). Ambito del recurso de casación en el proceso especial ante el tribunal del jurado (con ocasión de la STS, Sala 2ª, de 24 de febrero de 1998) [Scope of the appeal in the special proceedings before the jury (on the occasion of the STS, 2nd Chamber, February 24, 1998)]. Revista de Tribunales de Justicia, 8–9, 831–841.Google Scholar
Pedraz Penalva, E. (1992). Motivación y control de las resoluciones jurisdiccionales [Grounds for and review of judicial decisions]. Revista de Ciencias Jurídicas (El Salvador), 1, 31–125.Google Scholar
Pérez Gil, J. (2003). Private interests seeking punishment: Prosecution brought by private individuals and groups in Spain. Law & Policy, 25, 151–171.Google Scholar
Pérez-Cruz Martín, A. J. (1995). Anotaciones a la competencia y composición del tribunal del jurado: Especial consideración de los arts.1 y 5 de la LO 5/1995 del Tribunal del Jurado indatada [Annotations to the competence and composition of the jury court: Special consideration of articles 1 and 5 of the LO 5/1995 of the “non-dated” Jury Court]. Justicia, 3–4, 63–97.Google Scholar
Porterie, S., & Romano, A. (2018). El poder del Jurado: Descubriendo el juicio por jurados en la Provincia de Buenos Aires [The power of the jury: Discovering the jury trial in the Province of Buenos Aires]. Buenos Aires: INECIP.Google Scholar
Proposición no de Ley presentada por el Grupo Parlamentario Popular en el Congreso, de reforma de la Ley Orgánica del Tribunal del Jurado, Boletín Oficial de las Cortes Generales (BOCG) de 24 de marzo de 1997, Congreso de los Diputados, VI Legislatura, Serie D, Núm. 118, p. 8 [Draft law num. 162/000110 (Spain). BOCG March 24, 1997. Congress. VI legislative period. Series D, num. 118, 8]. www.congreso.es/portal/page/portal/Congreso/Congreso/IniciativasGoogle Scholar
Ramos Méndez, F. (1997). La implantación del jurado en el sistema del enjuiciamiento criminal español [The implementation of the jury in the Spanish criminal trial system]. In Gómez Colomer, J. L. & González Cussac, J. L. (Eds.), La reforma de la justicia penal. Estudios en homenaje al Prof. Klaus Tiedemann [Criminal justice reform. Studies in homage to Prof. Klaus Tiedemann] (pp. 337–348). Castellón, Spain: Universitat Jaume I.Google Scholar
Ríos Patio, G., & Espinoza Bonifaz, A. R. (2018). La conveniencia de establecer el sistema de jurado en la justicia penal de los países periféricos hispano americanos [The convenience of establishing the jury system in the criminal justice of the peripheral Hispanic American countries]. Revista Vasca de Derecho Procesal y Arbitraje, 30, 273–286.Google Scholar
Sanjurjo Rebollo, B. (1998). Jurados anónimos: Caso de Estados Unidos c. Bowles (Minnesota 1995) [Anonymous jurors: United States v. Bowles (Minnesota 1995)]. Revista de Derecho Procesal, 1, 147–162.Google Scholar
Sentencia de la Audiencia Provincial (SAP) de A Coruña de 11 de noviembre de 2015, JUR 2015/289211 [Provincial Court of A Coruña (Spain), Judgment JUR 205/289211 of November 11, 2015]. https://insignis.aranzadidigital-esGoogle Scholar
Sentencia de la Audiencia Provincial (SAP) de Guipúzcoa de 10 de marzo de 1997, JUR 1999/211124 [Provincial Court of Guipúzcoa (Spain), Judgment JUR 1999/211124 of March 10, 1997]. https://insignis.aranzadidigital-esGoogle Scholar
Sentencia de la Audiencia Provincial (SAP) de León de 10 de marzo de 2016, JUR 2016/50968 [Provincial Court of León (Spain), Judgment JUR 2016/50968 of March 10, 2016]. https://insignis.aranzadidigital-esGoogle Scholar
Sentencia de la Audiencia Provincial (SAP) de Málaga de 25 de septiembre de 2001, ARP 2002/290 [Provincial Court of Málaga (Spain), Judgment ARP 2002/290 of September 25, 2001]. https://insignis.aranzadidigital-esGoogle Scholar
Sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional (STC) 47/1983, de 31 de mayo [Constitutional Court (Spain), Judgment num. 47/1983 of May 31, 1983]. http://hj.tribunalconstitucional.es/HJ/es/Resolucion/Show/175Google Scholar
Sentencia del Tribunal Superior de Justicia (STSJ) de Andalucía en Granada de 1 de febrero de 2002, ARP 2002/50 [High Court of Justice of Andalusia in Granada (Spain), Judgment ARP 2002/50 of February 1, 2002]. https://insignis.aranzadidigital-esGoogle Scholar
Sentencia del Tribunal Superior de Justicia (STSJ) del País Vasco de 26 de junio de 1997, ARP 1998/3079 [High Court of Justice of the Basque Country, Judgment ARP 1998/3079 of June 26, 1997]. https://insignis.aranzadidigital-esGoogle Scholar
Sentencia del Tribunal Superior de Justicia (STSJ) de Comunidad Valenciana de 30 de enero de 2012, ARP 2012/81 [High Court of Justice of the Valencian Community, Judgment ARP 2012/81 of January 30, 2012]. https://insignis.aranzadidigital-esGoogle Scholar
Sentencia del Tribunal Supremo (STS) 364/1998, de 11 de marzo [Supreme Court (Spain), Judgment num. 364/1998 of March 11, 1998]. www.poderjudicial.es/search/index.jspGoogle Scholar
Sentencia del Tribunal Supremo (STS) 279/2003, de 12 de marzo [Supreme Court (Spain), Judgment num. 279/2003 of March 12, 2003]. www.poderjudicial.es/search/index.jspGoogle Scholar
Sentencia del Tribunal Supremo (STS) 373/2013, de 23 de abril [Supreme Court (Spain), Judgment num. 373/2013 of April 23, 2013]. www.poderjudicial.es/search/index.jspGoogle Scholar
Serra Domínguez, M. (2001). El jurado: Éxito o fracaso [The jury: Success or failure]. In Picó i Junoy, J & Abel Lluch, X (Eds.), Problemas actuales de la justicia penal [Current criminal justice issues] (pp. 59–66). Barcelona: Bosch.Google Scholar
Smith, V. L. (1991). Impact of pretrial instruction on jurors’ information processing and decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 220–228.Google Scholar
Taxquet v. Belgium, Judgment num. 926/05 (November 16, 2010). http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001–101739Google Scholar
Thaman, S. C. (1998). Spain returns to trial by jury. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, 21, 241–537.Google Scholar
Thaman, S. C.(2008). Comparative criminal procedure: A casebook approach. 2nd ed. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.Google Scholar
Thaman, S. C.(2011). Should criminal juries give reasons for their verdicts? The Spanish experience and the implications of the European Court of Human Rights Decision in Taxquet v. Belgium. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 86, 613–668.Google Scholar
Toharia, J. J. (1985). Los españoles ante el juicio con jurado [Spaniards at the jury trial]. Documentación Jurídica, 45–46, 285–297.Google Scholar
Toharia, J. J.(1994). Actitudes de los españoles ante la Administración de Justicia: Opiniones y aptitudes [Attitudes of Spaniards toward the administration of justice: Opinions and aptitudes]. Madrid: Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas.Google Scholar
Valero Romero, M. A. (2018). La argumentación lingüística en los juicios con Jurado [Linguistic argumentation in jury trials]. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch.Google Scholar
Vidmar, N. (1999). Foreword. Law and Contemporary Problems, 62, 1–5.Google Scholar
Villagómez Cebrián, M. (1998). La “apelación” de la sentencia en el juicio con jurado: Estudio del recurso establecido por la L.O. 5/1995 del Tribunal del Jurado [The “appeal” of the sentence in the jury trial: Study of the appeal established by the Jury Court Law 5/1995]. Bologna, Italy: Real Colegio de España.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×