Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Administration of Criminal Justice (1)
- Confessions (1)
- Criminal Evidence (1)
- Criminal Investigation (1)
- Criminal Procedure (1)
-
- Demonstrative Evidence (1)
- Evidence (1)
- International Courts (1)
- International Law (1)
- Law (1)
- Law and Fact (1)
- Law and neuroscience; psychology; neurolaw; criminal responsibility; tort liability; evidence; brain; fMRi; expert witnesses; neuroethics; sentencing (1)
- Privileges and Immunities (1)
- Self Incrimination (1)
- Technology Applications (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
The Supreme Court And The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination: Has The Burger Court Retreated?, Paul Marcus
The Supreme Court And The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination: Has The Burger Court Retreated?, Paul Marcus
Paul Marcus
No abstract provided.
Some Thoughts On The Evidentiary Aspects Of Technologically Produced Or Presented Evidence, Fredric I. Lederer
Some Thoughts On The Evidentiary Aspects Of Technologically Produced Or Presented Evidence, Fredric I. Lederer
Fredric I. Lederer
No abstract provided.
Grave Crimes And Weak Evidence: Fact-Finding Evolution In International Criminal Law, Nancy Amoury Combs
Grave Crimes And Weak Evidence: Fact-Finding Evolution In International Criminal Law, Nancy Amoury Combs
Nancy Combs
International criminal courts carry out some of the most important work that a legal system can conduct: prosecuting those who have visited death and destruction on millions. Despite the significance of their work--or perhaps because of it--international courts face tremendous challenges. Chief among them is accurate fact-finding. With alarming regularity, international criminal trials feature inconsistent, vague, and sometimes false testimony that renders judges unable to assess with any measure of certainty who did what to whom in the context of a mass atrocity. This Article provides the first-ever empirical study quantifying fact-finding in an international criminal court. The study shines …
The Psychiatric Expert As Due Process Decisionmaker, Robert S. Berger
The Psychiatric Expert As Due Process Decisionmaker, Robert S. Berger
Robert S. Berger
No abstract provided.
Neuroscientists In Court, Owen D. Jones, Anthony D. Wagner, David L. Faigman, Marcus E. Raichle
Neuroscientists In Court, Owen D. Jones, Anthony D. Wagner, David L. Faigman, Marcus E. Raichle
Owen Jones
Neuroscientific evidence is increasingly being offered in court cases. Consequently, the legal system needs neuroscientists to act as expert witnesses who can explain the limitations and interpretations of neuroscientific findings so that judges and jurors can make informed and appropriate inferences. The growing role of neuroscientists in court means that neuroscientists should be aware of important differences between the scientific and legal fields, and, especially, how scientific facts can be easily misunderstood by non-scientists,including judges and jurors.
This article describes similarities, as well as key differences, of legal and scientific cultures. And it explains six key principles about neuroscience that …