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

Evidence Commons

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

4,848 Full-Text Articles 3,370 Authors 2,249,100 Downloads 144 Institutions

All Articles in Evidence

Faceted Search

4,848 full-text articles. Page 1 of 95.

Feigned Consensus: Usurping The Law In Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma Prosecutions, Keith A. Findley, D. Michael Risinger, Patrick D. Barnes, Julie A. Mack, David A. Moran, Barry C. Scheck, Thomas L. Bohan 2020 University of Wisconsin Law School

Feigned Consensus: Usurping The Law In Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma Prosecutions, Keith A. Findley, D. Michael Risinger, Patrick D. Barnes, Julie A. Mack, David A. Moran, Barry C. Scheck, Thomas L. Bohan

Articles

Few medico-legal matters have generated as much controversy--both in the medical literature and in the courtroom--as Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS), now known more broadly as Abusive Head Trauma (AHT). The controversies are of enormous significance in the law because child abuse pediatricians claim, on the basis of a few non-specific medical findings supported by a weak and methodologically flawed research base, to be able to “diagnose” child abuse, and thereby to provide all of the evidence necessary to satisfy all of the legal elements for criminal prosecution (or removal of children from their parents). It is a matter, therefore, in ...


Commentary: Scientific Evidence - From A "Deferent" To A "Novice" Judge: Comments On Zoppellari's Paper, Marko Novak 2020 New University, European Faculty of Law

Commentary: Scientific Evidence - From A "Deferent" To A "Novice" Judge: Comments On Zoppellari's Paper, Marko Novak

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


The Acquisition Of Scientific Evidence Between Frye And Daubert. From Ad Hominem Arguments To Cross-Examination Among Experts, Lorenzo Zoppellari 2020 University of Trento

The Acquisition Of Scientific Evidence Between Frye And Daubert. From Ad Hominem Arguments To Cross-Examination Among Experts, Lorenzo Zoppellari

OSSA Conference Archive

The Frye and Daubert rulings give us two very different ways to intend the relation between law and science. Through the contributions of Wellman and Walton, we will see how the main method to question the expert’s testimony before a judge deferent to science is to question her personal integrity by using ad hominem arguments. Otherwise, using Alvin Goldman’s novice/expert problem, we will investigate if other manners of argumentative cross-examinations are possible.


The Clergy-Penitent Privilege: The Role Of Clergy In Perpetuating And Preventing Domestic Violence, Kami Orton 2020 University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law

The Clergy-Penitent Privilege: The Role Of Clergy In Perpetuating And Preventing Domestic Violence, Kami Orton

Nevada Law Journal Forum

Domestic violence occurs at alarming rates in all socioeconomic levels, races, locations, sexual orientations, and professions. Domestic violence occurs at similar frequencies among religious and non-religious individuals. Clergy play an important role in religious communities. The clergy-penitent privilege was created to protect the relationship between clergy and communicant and prevents clergy from testifying about spiritual communications. However, the privilege is currently an absolute privilege which is unnecessary and hurts victims and survivors of domestic violence. Additionally, the statutorily written privilege is not aligned with the application and practice of the privilege. Practice indicates clergy tend to desire to testify and ...


Climate Change Science And The Daubert Standard, Fred K. Morrison, Craig Manson, Matthew C. Wickersham 2020 William & Mary Law School

Climate Change Science And The Daubert Standard, Fred K. Morrison, Craig Manson, Matthew C. Wickersham

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

Climate change science attempts to predict the future based on complex modeling of potential levels of CO2, other greenhouse gases, manmade conditions, and naturally occurring events. Even the most widely cited analysis of climate change studies expressly acknowledges the limitations on accurately predicting the effects of climate change on anything other than a macro basis.1 These studies acknowledge substantial uncertainty in the prediction of climate change and its effects on a regional level, much less on a local level.2 Recent lawsuits brought by the State of Rhode Island; the counties of King (Washington), Marin (California), and San Mateo ...


Young Children's Ability To Describe Intermediate Clothing Placement, Breanne E. Wylie, Stacia N. Stolzenberg, Kelly McWilliams, Angela Evans, Thomas D. Lyon 2020 Brock University

Young Children's Ability To Describe Intermediate Clothing Placement, Breanne E. Wylie, Stacia N. Stolzenberg, Kelly Mcwilliams, Angela Evans, Thomas D. Lyon

University of Southern California Legal Studies Working Paper Series

Children’s ability to adequately describe clothing placement is essential to evaluating their allegations of sexual abuse. Intermediate clothing placement (partially removed clothing) may be difficult for young children to describe, requiring more detailed explanations to indicate the location of clothing (e.g., the clothes were pulled down to the knees). The current study investigated 172 3- to 6-year-olds’ descriptions of clothing placement when responding to commonly used questions (yes/no, forced-choice, open-choice, where), as well as children’s on-off response tendencies when describing intermediate placement (i.e.., labeling the clothing as fully on or off). Results revealed that "where ...


Truth And Justice Vs. The Integrity Of The Family Unit: Family Members' Testimonies From A Comparative And Normative Viewpoint, Dr. Guy Ben-David 2020 Netanya Academic College

Truth And Justice Vs. The Integrity Of The Family Unit: Family Members' Testimonies From A Comparative And Normative Viewpoint, Dr. Guy Ben-David

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.


The Truthsayer And The Court: Expert Testimony On Credibility, Michael W. Mullane 2020 University of Maine School of Law

The Truthsayer And The Court: Expert Testimony On Credibility, Michael W. Mullane

Maine Law Review

The purpose of this Article is to analyze the admissibility of expert testimony on credibility. State v. Woodburn serves as a lens to focus on the broader issues. The primary issue is an examination of expert testimony on credibility in light of the Federal Rules of Evidence and their progeny. The Rules of Evidence mandate admission or exclusion of expert testimony based on certain criteria. How are these criteria applied to expert testimony on credibility? How should they be applied? The surprising survivability of other criteria discarded by the Rules is also considered.


State V. Pinkham: Erosion Of Meaningful Forth Amendment Protection For Vehicle Stops In Maine?, Roger M. Clement Jr. 2020 University of Maine School of Law

State V. Pinkham: Erosion Of Meaningful Forth Amendment Protection For Vehicle Stops In Maine?, Roger M. Clement Jr.

Maine Law Review

In State v. Pinkham, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, held that a police officer's stop of a motorist to inquire and advise about the motorist's improper-but not illegal-lane usage did not necessarily violate the Fourth Amendment's proscription against unreasonable seizures. The Pinkham decision is the first time that the Law Court has validated the stop of a moving vehicle in the absence of either a suspected violation of law or an imminent, ongoing threat to highway safety.
This Note considers whether the Law Court was correct in sustaining the police officer's ...


Please Stop: The Law Court's Recent Roadblock Decisions, Jonathan A. Block 2020 University of Maine School of Law

Please Stop: The Law Court's Recent Roadblock Decisions, Jonathan A. Block

Maine Law Review

Police checkpoints or “roadblocks” have become an increasingly utilized law enforcement tool. At best, these checkpoints result in only a minor inconvenience to motorists. When abused, however, roadblocks have the potential for invidious invasions of privacy and personal freedom. Roadblocks are designed to deter, and to a lesser extent detect, criminal activity by stopping everyone—both the guilty and the law-abiding—for a brief inspection, thereby impinging to some degree on one's freedom of travel, privacy, and “right to be let alone.” Such “seizures” must be “reasonable” under the Fourth Amendment in order to survive constitutional challenge. The major ...


The Adversarial Mindset, Dan Simon, Minwoo Ahn, Douglas M. Stenstrom, Stephen J. Read 2020 USC Gould School of Law

The Adversarial Mindset, Dan Simon, Minwoo Ahn, Douglas M. Stenstrom, Stephen J. Read

University of Southern California Legal Studies Working Paper Series

Many social outcomes are reached by means of competitions between opposing actors. While the positive effects of competition are beyond dispute, this paper contends that competitive situations also trigger a particular psychological mindset that can distort contestants’ judgment and lead to suboptimal courses of action. The paper presents a theoretical framework that consists of a myside bias, by which people adopt a self-serving view of the competition, evaluate themselves favorably, and evaluate their counterpart unfavorably. The framework also proposes the construct of otherside bias, by which people impute to their counterparts distortions that are similar, but opposite, to their own ...


Does Impeachment By Conviction Create Undue Prejudice? An Experiment And An Analysis, David Crump 2020 The University of Akron

Does Impeachment By Conviction Create Undue Prejudice? An Experiment And An Analysis, David Crump

Akron Law Review

The Federal Rules of Evidence, and rules in the States, allow for impeachment of the testimony of a witness by proof of the witness's criminal convictions. If the witness is the criminal defendant, however, there are restrictions on this kind of impeachment. The theory is that the jury is supposed to use the evidence solely for impeachment and not to support an inference that the defendant has a propensity toward committing crimes. But intuition tells us that the jury is likely to be influenced toward the prohibited inference of guilt of the crime charged rather than devaluation of credibility ...


Secret Conviction Programs, Meghan J. Ryan 2020 Southern Methodist University

Secret Conviction Programs, Meghan J. Ryan

Washington and Lee Law Review

Judges and juries across the country are convicting criminal defendants based on secret evidence. Although defendants have sought access to the details of this evidence—the results of computer programs and their underlying algorithms and source codes—judges have generally denied their requests. Instead, judges have prioritized the business interests of the for-profit companies that developed these “conviction programs” and which could lose market share if the secret algorithms and source codes on which the programs are based were exposed. This decision has jeopardized criminal defendants’ constitutional rights.


Lost Opportunity: Supreme Court Declines To Resolve Circuit Split On Brady Obligations During Plea-Bargaining, Cameron Casey 2020 Boston College Law School

Lost Opportunity: Supreme Court Declines To Resolve Circuit Split On Brady Obligations During Plea-Bargaining, Cameron Casey

Boston College Law Review

On September 18, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Alvarez v. City of Brownsville held that prosecutors are not constitutionally required to disclose exculpatory evidence to criminal defendants during the plea-bargaining process. With its decision, the Fifth Circuit entered the circuit split over the meaning of impeachment evidence in the context of the United States Supreme Court’s 2002 decision in United States v. Ruiz, where the Court held that the prosecution need not turn over impeachment evidence during the plea-bargaining process. Some circuits interpret impeachment evidence to include exculpatory evidence, whereas others had ...


Confronting Memory Loss, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman 2020 Georgetown University Law Center

Confronting Memory Loss, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment grants “the accused” in “all criminal prosecutions” a right “to be confronted with the witnesses against him.” A particular problem occurs when there is a gap in time between the testimony that is offered, and the cross-examination of it, as where, pursuant to a hearsay exception or exemption, evidence of a current witness’s prior statement is offered and for some intervening reason her current memory is impaired. Does this fatally affect the opportunity to “confront” the witness? The Supreme Court has, to date, left unclear the extent to which a memory-impaired witness ...


Setting The Ground Rules: Use And Practice Of Ground Rules In Child Forensic Interviews, Melanie Fessinger, Kelly McWilliams, Faizun N. Bakth, Thomas D. Lyon 2020 CUNY John Jay College

Setting The Ground Rules: Use And Practice Of Ground Rules In Child Forensic Interviews, Melanie Fessinger, Kelly Mcwilliams, Faizun N. Bakth, Thomas D. Lyon

University of Southern California Legal Studies Working Paper Series

Most child forensic interviewing protocols recommend that interviewers administer a series of ground rules to emphasize concepts that are important to accurately answering interview questions. Limited research has examined whether interviewers follow ground rules recommendations in real-world forensic interviews. In this study, we examined how often highly trained interviewers presented and practiced each of the recommended ground rules. We also examined whether children accurately responded to practice questions. We coded transcripts from 241 forensic interviews of 4- to 12-year-old children conducted by interviewers in the United States who were largely trained using the Ten Step Investigative Interview (Lyon, 2014). Results ...


Deciding, ‘What Happened?’ When We Don’T Really Know: Finding Theoretical Grounding For Legitimate Judicial Fact-Finding, Nayha Acharya 2020 Dalhousie University Schulich School of Law

Deciding, ‘What Happened?’ When We Don’T Really Know: Finding Theoretical Grounding For Legitimate Judicial Fact-Finding, Nayha Acharya

Articles, Book Chapters, & Blogs

The crucial question for many legal disputes is “what happened,”? and there is often no easy answer. Fact-finding is an uncertain endeavor and risk of inaccuracy is inevitable. As such, I ask, on what basis can we accept the legitimacy of judicial fact-findings. I conclude that acceptable factual determinations depend on adherence to a legitimate process of fact-finding. Adopting Jürgen Habermas’s insights, I offer a theoretical grounding for the acceptability of judicial fact-finding. The theory holds that legal processes must embody respect for legal subjects as equal and autonomous agents. This necessitates two procedural features. First, fact-finding processes ...


Power And Statistical Significance In Securities Fraud Litigation, Jill E. Fisch, Jonah B. Gelbach 2020 University of Pennsylvania Law School

Power And Statistical Significance In Securities Fraud Litigation, Jill E. Fisch, Jonah B. Gelbach

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law

Event studies, a half-century-old approach to measuring the effect of events on stock prices, are now ubiquitous in securities fraud litigation. In determining whether the event study demonstrates a price effect, expert witnesses typically base their conclusion on whether the results are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level, a threshold that is drawn from the academic literature. As a positive matter, this represents a disconnect with legal standards of proof. As a normative matter, it may reduce enforcement of fraud claims because litigation event studies typically involve quite low statistical power even for large-scale frauds.

This paper, written for ...


Revitalizing Fourth Amendment Protections: A True Totality Of The Circumstances Test In § 1983 Probable Cause Determinations, Ryan Sullivan 2020 University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Revitalizing Fourth Amendment Protections: A True Totality Of The Circumstances Test In § 1983 Probable Cause Determinations, Ryan Sullivan

College of Law, Faculty Publications

The Article analyzes claims of police misconduct and false arrest, specifically addressing the issue of whether a police officer may ignore evidence of an affirmative defense, such as self-defense, when determining probable cause for an arrest. The inquiry most often arises in § 1983 civil claims for false arrest where the officer was aware of some evidence a crime had been committed, but was also aware of facts indicating the suspect had an affirmative defense to the crime observed. In extreme cases, the affirmative defense at issue is actually self-defense in response to the officer’s own unlawful conduct. As police ...


Blatantly Biased: Expanding Pena-Rodriguez To Cases Of Bias Against Sexual Orientation, Religion, And Sex, Tressa Bussio 2020 William & Mary Law School

Blatantly Biased: Expanding Pena-Rodriguez To Cases Of Bias Against Sexual Orientation, Religion, And Sex, Tressa Bussio

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.


Digital Commons powered by bepress