Minds, Brains, and the Law

Scientific Advances and the Death Penalty

The Wall Street Journal Law Blog has an interesting piece on science and the death penalty.  Here is a brief excerpt:

Will scientific advances ultimately spell doom for capital punishment?

That’s the question raised by this piece over at the Arizona Republic, which examined a recent conference at Arizona State that looked at advances in neuroscience and genetics — and how they might help explain criminal behavior.

The thought goes like this: A better understanding of criminal behavior might ultimately lead society to show more compassion for those who suffer from the genetic defects that lead them to kill, maim, or commit other criminal acts.

“There is a ton of new science coming forward in both genetics and neuroscience that describe the brain in a way that leads to a predisposition to violent behavior,” said Gary Marchant, the executive director of the Center for Law, Science & Innovations at Arizona State University’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law. In the not-to-distant future, predicts Marchant, science will kill the death penalty.

Happy reading!

Malintent Detection and the Spectre of Pre-Crime

Nature News has a recent piece on developing technologies for detecting "malintent."  Here is an excerpt:

"Planning a sojourn in the northeastern United States? You could soon be taking part in a novel security programme that can supposedly 'sense' whether you are planning to commit a crime.

Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST), a US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) programme designed to spot people who are intending to commit a terrorist act, has in the past few months completed its first round of field tests at an undisclosed location in the northeast, Nature has learned.

Like a lie detector, FAST measures a variety of physiological indicators, ranging from heart rate to the steadiness of a person's gaze, to judge a subject's state of mind. But there are major differences from the polygraph. FAST relies on non-contact sensors, so it can measure indicators as someone walks through a corridor at an airport, and it does not depend on active questioning of the subject.

The tactic has drawn comparisons with the science-fiction concept of 'pre-crime', popularized by the film Minority Report, in which security services can detect someone's intention to commit a crime. Unlike the system in the film, FAST does not rely on a trio of human mutants who can see the future. But the programme has attracted copious criticism from researchers who question the science behind it."

Check out the original article for the rest of the story!

 

The Deciding Brain

Charlie Rose recently hosted a series of discussions about recent advances in the sciences of the mind. One of these shows featured LANP's own Joshua Greene.  The episide is entitled, "The Deciding Brain." 

Psychopathy and Impaired Reasoning

The Huffington Post just ran a piece about psychopathy entitled "The Sick Logic of a Psychopath" that highlights the recent work by (and includes an interview with) our very own Kent Kiehl.  As always, happy reading!

Software, Prediction, and Future Violence

ABC News recently posted a piece entitled "Software Predicts Criminal Behavior" which examines the software that has been developed by Richard Berk and colleagues for the purposes of violence risk assessment.  Legal decision makers in Washington D.C. are going to be using the software to make determinations concerning sentencing and bail. 

Youth, the Brain, Neuroimaging, and Responsibility

New Scientist has a recent piece entitled "Brain Scans May Fix Criminal Responsibility" which explores the research being done by Nico Dosenbach and others with pattern classification and neural imaging and its potential legal applications--especially when it comes to making determinations concerning brain maturity and moral/legal responsibility (or lack thereof).

NPR Three-peat on Neuroscience and Responsibility

Barbara Hagerty recently ran three pieces for NPR on the relationship between recent advances in science--especially MAOA research and work on psychopathy--and responsibility:

1. "A Neuroscientist Uncovers a Dark Secret"
2. "Inside a Psychopath's Brain"
3. "Can Your Genes Make You Murder?"

As always, happy reading!

United States v. Semrau

I have posted several things (see here and here) as of late about the two recent high profile court cases involving the admissibility of neural lie detection.  The case that has garnered the most attention is United States v. Semrau.  The United States Magistrate released his recommendation yesterday.  In short, neural lie detection was deemed to be inadmissible.   During the hearings, Marc Raichle and Peter Imrey--speaking independently as experts for the state and not as representatives of the LANP--testified against the admissibility of CEPHOS fMRI lie detection.  The court relied heavily on their testimony.  It also cited an article by LANP members Hank Greely and Judy Illes and another article by former LANP post-doctoral fellows Emily Murphy and Teneille Brown in reaching its decision.  

The complete recommendation can be found in the following attachment:

Download Semrau

Miller on Neural Lie Detection in the Courtroom

Greg Miller has recently written three pieces for Science Magazine on neural lie detection in the courtroom:

1. "fMRI Lie Detection Get's Its Day in Court"
2. "fMRI Lie Detection Hearing Ends, Decision Still to Come"
3. "Can Brain Scans Detect Lies"

As always, happy reading!

Detecting Individual Memories with Neuroimaging

Here is a recent article that readers of this blog will find of interest:

Rissman, J., Greely, H., and Wagner, A.D. (2001).  Detecting individual memories through the neural decoding of memory states and past experience.  PNAS.

The Stanford University press release can be found here.  Finally, the work has been featured in the popular press here and here.  As always, happy reading!