Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Jane Campbell Moriarty

Evidence

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

Deceptively Simple: Framing, Intuition And Judicial Gatekeeping Of Forensic Feature-Comparison Methods Evidence, Jane Campbell Moriarty Feb 2018

Deceptively Simple: Framing, Intuition And Judicial Gatekeeping Of Forensic Feature-Comparison Methods Evidence, Jane Campbell Moriarty

Jane Campbell Moriarty

During the Symposium for the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules, held at Boston College on October 27, 2017, the scientists, statisticians, legal academics, and criminal defense lawyers presented a unified theme: the federal courts have not fulfilled their role as gatekeepers to exclude or limit potentially unreliable feature-comparison methods of forensic science evidence (“FCM evidence”). The only voiced dissents came from the DOJ and FBI lawyers, who argued that the courts had been admitting such pattern-matching evidence properly and that the evidence was indeed reliable.

Go to article

Who Speaks For Neuroscience? Neuroimaging Evidence And Courtroom Expertise, Jane Campbell Moriarty, Daniel D. Langleben Dec 2017

Who Speaks For Neuroscience? Neuroimaging Evidence And Courtroom Expertise, Jane Campbell Moriarty, Daniel D. Langleben

Jane Campbell Moriarty

This Article explores the issue of proper qualifications necessary for expert witnesses who testify about structural and functional neuroimaging evidence. It outlines the nature of the problem; explains some of the complexity of the question of expertise as a matter of medicine, science, and law, using criminal cases involving mental health as a helpful template to discuss the issues; provides some thoughts about better regulating neuroimaging evidence by focusing on the qualifications of experts; and offers modest policy suggestions to address the question of expert competence.

Go to article

Will History Be Servitude?: The Nas Report On Forensic Science And The Rule Of The Judiciary, Jane Moriarty Dec 2009

Will History Be Servitude?: The Nas Report On Forensic Science And The Rule Of The Judiciary, Jane Moriarty

Jane Campbell Moriarty

For several decades, the prosecution and its witnesses have maintained that despite little research and virtually no standards, they can match a fingerprint, handwriting, bullet and bullet cartridge, hair, dental imprint, footprint, tire track, or even a lip print to its unique source (collectively, “individualization evidence”). Not only can they match it, they claim, they can do so often without any error rate. In the last few decades, with the help of lawyers and academics, litigants have challenged the underlying reliability of individualization evidence. Scholars in various disciplines have written about the startling state of individualization evidence, including its lack …

Go to article

Neuroscience, Law & Government: Foreword To The Symposium, Jane Moriarty Dec 2008

Neuroscience, Law & Government: Foreword To The Symposium, Jane Moriarty

Jane Campbell Moriarty

The legal and legislative systems have begun to rely on neuroscience in various types of decision-making. Without question, the relationship between the disciplines will become more enmeshed as more data is generated by neuroscientists. Are we ready for this potential sea change that will be both rich and strange?

Go to article

“Misconvictions,” Science And The Ministers Of Justice, Jane Campbell Moriarty Jan 2007

“Misconvictions,” Science And The Ministers Of Justice, Jane Campbell Moriarty

Jane Campbell Moriarty

DNA evidence has exonerated over two hundred wrongfully convicted defendants in the last several years, providing insights into the causes of such convictions. One such cause, faulty scientific evidence, is a focus of this article. For decades, many have written about the prevalence of and reasons for wrongful convictions --what I have termed “misconvictions.” A few reasons support the coinage “misconvictions”: the miscarriage of justice when an innocent person is convicted; the mistakes involved in the prosecution and trial of the case; the mistaken identification that may have occurred; and finally, the recognition that all wrongful convictions are a missed …

Go to article