-
The Case Against Brain Scans As Evidence In Court
NPR: It’s not just people who go on trial these days. It’s their brains. More and more lawyers are arguing that some defendants deserve special consideration because they have brains that are immature or impaired
-
The Limits of Memory for Witnesses of Crime
Pacific Standard: Armed robbery. Bank hold-ups. Sleight-of-hand shoplifting. While not all of these crimes are violent, what they all have in common is the sudden, stressful position they can often put eyewitnesses and victims in—namely
-
The Two Faces of Shame
The Huffington Post: Twenty-four-year-old Shawn Gementera was caught red-handed pilfering letters from private mailboxes along San Francisco’s Fulton Street. Mail theft is a serious crime, and it was not Gementera’s first run-in with the law.
-
Forensic experts ‘biased towards side which pays them’
The Telegraph: Although forensic experts are meant to be completely impartial when giving an expert opinion to the jury, they tend to favour the side which employs them. A study found that while the experts
-
Bias in the Court
Pacific Standard: On November 14, 1978, a Texas jury found Thomas Barefoot guilty of the murder of Bell County police officer Carl Levin. Based on the gravity of the crime and the testimony of two
-
Forensic Experts May Be Biased By the Side That Retains Them
Forensic psychologists and psychiatrists are ethically bound to be impartial when performing evaluations or providing expert opinions in court. But new research suggests that courtroom experts’ evaluations may be influenced by whether their paycheck comes
