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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

Absolutist Admissibility At The Icc: Revalidating Authentic Domestic Investigations, Michael A. Newton Jan 2021

Absolutist Admissibility At The Icc: Revalidating Authentic Domestic Investigations, Michael A. Newton

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Current jurisprudential trends empower the International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor to override domestic investigative authorities in a manner that violates the letter and spirit of the Rome Statute. Sovereign states have primary responsibility to document, investigate and prevent atrocity crimes. Yet, current ICC practice subverts domestic enforcement efforts. No provision of the Rome Statute permits the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) to substitute its unfettered judgment over the good-faith discretion of domestic prosecutors. ICC judges have created de facto institutional jurisdictional primacy by relying upon mere assertions regarding the insufficiency of domestic efforts. This trend is particularly problematic at the …


Brain Scans As Evidence: Truths, Proofs, Lies, And Lessons, Owen D. Jones, Francis X. Shen Jan 2011

Brain Scans As Evidence: Truths, Proofs, Lies, And Lessons, Owen D. Jones, Francis X. Shen

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This contribution to the Brain Sciences in the Courtroom Symposium identifies and discusses issues important to admissibility determinations when courts confront brain-scan evidence. Through the vehicle of the landmark 2010 federal criminal trial U.S. v. Semrau (which considered, for the first time, the admissibility of brain scans for lie detection purposes) this article highlights critical evidentiary issues involving: 1) experimental design; 2) ecological and external validity; 3) subject compliance with researcher instructions; 4) false positives; and 5) drawing inferences about individuals from group data. The article’s lessons are broadly applicable to the new wave of neurolaw cases now being seen …


Does Frye Or Daubert Matter? A Study Of Scientific Admissibility Standards, Edward K. Cheng, Albert Yoon Jan 2005

Does Frye Or Daubert Matter? A Study Of Scientific Admissibility Standards, Edward K. Cheng, Albert Yoon

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Nearly every treatment of scientific evidence begins with a faithful comparison between the Frye and Daubert standards. Since 1993, jurists and legal scholars have spiritedly debated which standard is preferable and whether particular states should adopt one standard or the other. These efforts beg the question: Does a state's choice of scientific admissibility standard matter? A growing number of scholars suspect that the answer is no. Under this theory, the import of the Supreme Court's Daubert decision was not in its doctrinal standard, but rather in the general consciousness it raised about the problems of unreliable scientific evidence. This Article …


Sender Beware: The Discoverability And Admissibility Of E-Mail, William Decoste Jan 2000

Sender Beware: The Discoverability And Admissibility Of E-Mail, William Decoste

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

This Note will explore the current body of jurisprudence concerning the discoverability and admissibility of e-mail in both the civil and criminal contexts. Beginning with a brief explanation of the relevant forms of information technology and electronic communication, it will examine the common misconceptions that fuel the ongoing imprudent use of e-mail. It will then trace the development of the case law, from the foundational cases that first confronted electronic evidence to recent precedent specifically addressing the various forms of contemporary e-mail. Federal statutory law regulating the acquisition and use of electronic communications will also be discussed. This Note will …


Evidence: A Functional Meaning, Lyman R. Patterson Jun 1965

Evidence: A Functional Meaning, Lyman R. Patterson

Vanderbilt Law Review

A trial always involves two basic problems-the problem of ascertaining the truth of the matter in issue, and the problem of re-solving a dispute. The former can be characterized as the probative problem, arising from the problem of proving, and the latter as the forensic problem, arising from the procedural problem of proving-in-a-trial. The probative problem is a problem of evidence in that it is the problem of using evidence to ascertain the truth by "the ratiocinative process of continuous persuasion."' The forensic problem is a problem of the admissibility of evidence, and it is the forensic problem which has …


A Symposium On Evidence -- Foreward, Orie L. Phillips Apr 1952

A Symposium On Evidence -- Foreward, Orie L. Phillips

Vanderbilt Law Review

This is the fifth in a series of symposia published by the Vanderbilt Law Review on important legal subjects. This symposium covers a number of selected subjects in the field of Evidence. The privilege accorded me of writing this foreword affords me the opportunity to express my sincere appreciation of this excellent symposium and the confident hope that it will be most helpful to students, judges and practicing lawyers.

The term "Evidence" imports the means by which any alleged matter of fact, the truth of which is submitted to investigation, is established or disproved.' It embraces the rules of law …