An Empirical Study of the Use of Neuroscientific Evidence in Sentencing in New South Wales, Australia

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

An Empirical Study of the Use of Neuroscientific Evidence in Sentencing in New South Wales, Australia An Empirical Study of the Use of Neuroscientific Evidence in Sentencing in New South Wales, Australia Armin Alimardani A thesis in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Law Faculty of Law March 2019 THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES – Thesis/Dissertation Sheet Surname or Family name: Alimardani First name: Armin Other name/s: N/A Abbreviation for degree as given in the University calendar: PhD School: Law Faculty: Law Title: An Empirical Study of the Use of Neuroscientific Evidence in Sentencing in New South Wales, Australia ABSTRACT In the neurolaw literature there are many debates and claims associated with the increasing use of neuroscience in law. These claims can be sorted into three broad categories: predictive claims that assert how neuroscientific evidence will be used or will influence the application of criminal law principles in the future; descriptive claims about how neuroscientific evidence is being used in practice; and normative claims which assert how neuroscientific evidence ought to be used in practice. While it has been at least 40 years since the first use of neuroscience in Australian courts, neurolaw claims have not been substantiated by comprehensive and systematic empirical research on how neuroscience is used in practice. Thus prior to this thesis it was unclear whether the actual approach of the courts is consistent with claims of various neurolaw scholars. To fill this substantial void, this thesis offers an empirically oriented review of seven claims about the introduction and use of neuroscientific evidence applied to sentencing courts in New South Wales, Australia. To pursue this research, a comprehensive and systematic search was conducted on three databases finding 214 decisions before 2016 in which neuroscientific evidence was discussed. These cases were then coded, and analysed. The findings of the study suggest that there are some inconsistencies with the neurolaw claims and how neuroscientific evidence is being used in practice. Although not all these inconsistencies warrant concern, there appears to be a need for practice-oriented instruments and guidelines about the use of neuroscience in practice. DECLARATION RELATING TO DISPOSITION OF PROJECT THESIS/DISSERTATION I HEREBY GRANT TO THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES OR ITS AGENTS THE RIGHT TO ARCHIVE AND TO MAKE AVAILABLE MY THESIS OR DISSERTATION IN WHOLE OR IN PART IN THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES IN ALL FORMS OF MEDIA, NOW OR HERE AFTER KNOWN, SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE COPYRIGHT ACT 1968. I RETAIN ALL PROPERTY RIGHTS, SUCH AS PATENT RIGHTS. I ALSO RETAIN THE RIGHT TO USE IN FUTURE WORKS (SUCH AS ARTICLES OR BOOKS) ALL OR PART OF THIS THESIS OR DISSERTATION. I ALSO AUTHORISE UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS TO USE THE 350 WORD ABSTRACT OF MY THESIS IN DISSERTATION ABSTRACTS INTERNATIONAL (THIS IS APPLICABLE TO DOCTORAL THESES ONLY). 23 April 2019 ……………………………………………………. ……………..….......……………..…....... ………..................... Signature Witness Signature Date The University recognises that there may be exceptional circumstances requiring restrictions on copying or conditions on use. Requests for restriction for a period of up to 2 years must be made in writing. Requests for a longer period of restriction may be considered in exceptional circumstances and require the approval of the Dean of Graduate Research. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date of completion of requirements for Award: I ORIGINALITY STATEMENT ‘I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and to the best of my knowledge it contains no materials previously published or written by another person, or substantial proportions of material which have been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma at UNSW or any other educational institution, except where due acknowledgement is made in the thesis. Any contribution made to the research by others, with whom I have worked at UNSW or elsewhere, is explicitly acknowledged in the thesis. I also declare that the intellectual content of this thesis is the product of my own work, except to the extent that assistance from others in the project's design and conception or in style, presentation and linguistic expression is acknowledged.’ Signed ................................................................. Date 23/04/2019 II 23/Jul/2019 23/Jul/2019 III INCLUSION OF PUBLICATIONS STATEMENT UNSW is supportive of candidates publishing their research results during their candidature as detailed in the UNSW Thesis Examination Procedure. Publications can be used in their thesis in lieu of a Chapter if: • The student contributed greater than 50% of the content in the publication and is the “primary author”, ie. the student was responsible primarily for the planning, execution and preparation of the work for publication • The student has approval to include the publication in their thesis in lieu of a Chapter from their supervisor and Postgraduate Coordinator. • The publication is not subject to any obligations or contractual agreements with a third party that would constrain its inclusion in the thesis Please indicate whether this thesis contains published material or not. This thesis contains no publications, either published or submitted for publication ☐ Some of the work described in this thesis has been published and it has been ☒ documented in the relevant Chapters with acknowledgement This thesis has publications (either published or submitted for publication) ☐ incorporated into it in lieu of a chapter and the details are presented below CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION I declare that: • I have complied with the Thesis Examination Procedure • where I have used a publication in lieu of a Chapter, the listed publication(s) below meet(s) the requirements to be included in the thesis. Name Signature Date (dd/mm/yy) Armin Alimardani 23/04/2019 Postgraduate Coordinator’s Declaration I declare that: • the information below is accurate • where listed publication(s) have been used in lieu of Chapter(s), their use complies with the Thesis Examination Procedure • the minimum requirements for the format of the thesis have been met. PGC’s Name PGC’s Signature Date (dd/mm/yy) IV Publications and presentations arising from this dissertation Publications Alimardani, A, Chin, J (2019) Neurolaw in Australia: The Use of Neuroscience in Australian Criminal Proceedings, Neuroethics https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-018-09395-z Alimardani, A (2018) Neuroscience, Criminal Responsibility and Sentencing in an Islamic Country: Iran, Journal of Law and Biosciences, Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/jlb/lsy024 Presentations Alimardani, A (2018) A Shift from Retribution and Towards Consequentialism: An Empirical Study of the Use of Neuroscience in Australian Courts. Presented in The 31th annual Australian and New Zealand Society of Criminology (ANZSOC) conference, Melbourne, Australia. Alimardani, A, Vincent, N. A (2018) Doing Time: Neuroscience and Custodial Sentencing, Presented in The 12th annual ANZSOC Postgraduate and Early Career Research Conference, Melbourne, Australia. Alimardani, A, Vincent, N. A. (2018), Doing Time: Neuroscience and Custodial Sentencing, Poster session in NEUROSCIENCE & SOCIETY: Ethics, Law, and Technology Conference, Sydney, Australia Alimardani, A (2018) Neurolaw in Australia: An Empirical Study of the Use of Neuroscientific Evidence in Sentencing, Presented at NEUROSCIENCE & SOCIETY: Ethics, Law, and Technology Conference, Sydney, Australia Alimardani, A (2017) Neuro-time-relativity and Sentencing: How Subjective Perception of Time may Change the Length of the Prison Sentence, presented at Law, Technology and Innovation (LTI) Junior Scholars Forum, Faculty of Law, UNSW and accepted in The 10th Melbourne Doctoral Forum on Legal Theory Melbourne Law School – this paper only presented at LTI Junior Scholars Forum UNSW. V Armin Alimardani, Jason M. Chin (2017) Neurolaw in Australia: The Use of Neuroscientific Evidence in Criminal Proceedings, Presented in The 30th annual Australian and New Zealand Society of Criminology (ANZSOC) conference, Canberra, Australia. Armin Alimardani, Jason M. Chin, (2017) Neurolaw in Australia: The Use of Neuroscientific Evidence in Criminal Proceedings, Poster session presented at the annual meeting of Neuroscience and Society: Ethical, Legal & Clinical Implications of Neuroscience Research Conference, Sydney, Australia. Alimardani, A (2017) The Emergence of Neuroscience as a Commonly Admitted Type of Evidence in Australian Criminal Courts: How it Happened and Why We Should Care, The 30th annual Australian and New Zealand Society of Criminology (ANZSOC) conference, Canberra, Australia. Alimardani, A (2017) Uncovering Infamous Biological Theories Buried in the Criminal Justice System: An Empirical Study of the Use of Neuroscience in Australian Criminal Courts, Presented in The 11th annual ANZSOC Postgraduate and Early Career Research Conference, Canberra, Australia. Alimardani, A (2016) Explaining crime in criminal proceedings: Towards a new approach, Presented in The 29th Annual Australian and New Zealand Society of Criminology conference, Hobart, Australia Alimardani, A (2016) Explaining Crime: Contributing Factors within a Multilayered Network (CFMN), Presented in The 10th ANZSOC Postgraduate & Early Career Researcher Conference (PECRC), Hobart, Australia VI TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATIONS .............................................................................................................................XI ABSTRACT ...............................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Toward an Integrative Science of the Brain and Crime
    BioSocieties https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-019-00167-3 COMMENTARY Mind the gap: toward an integrative science of the brain and crime Eyal Aharoni1 · Nathaniel E. Anderson2 · J. C. Barnes3 · Corey H. Allen4 · Kent A. Kiehl2 © Springer Nature Limited 2019 In the recent article, Criminalizing the brain: Neurocriminology and the production of strategic ignorance, Fallin et al. (2018) argue that most neuroscientists working with antisocial populations are guilty of suppressing, obfuscating, and erasing legiti- mate social explanations for criminal behavior as part of a strategic attempt to tout their reductionist preconceptions of behavior and to advance their own professional, extra-scientifc agendas. While we applaud their call for greater inclusion of social/ contextual factors into neurocriminological research, we fnd that they overstate the case against neurocriminology and understate important eforts by this emerg- ing community to generate signifcant and cross-disciplinary contributions to the understanding of antisocial behavior. Learning to identify and avoid such mischar- acterizations is critical for the pursuit of much-needed interdisciplinary research and collaboration on the prediction, explanation, and remediation of antisocial behavior. By critically evaluating Fallin et al.’s claims, we hope to strike a conciliatory bal- ance, which is more likely to promote integration rather than antagonism between disciplines. Fallin and colleagues correctly describe biosocial criminology as an emerging discipline that integrates historically neglected biological factors and neuroscientifc methods in the study of antisocial behavior. Indeed, this paradigm has demonstrated the value of genetics (Brunner et al. 1993), physiology (Latvala et al. 2015), bio- chemistry (Coccaro et al. 1998), and neuroimaging (Anderson and Kiehl 2012) for * Eyal Aharoni [email protected] 1 Department of Psychology, Georgia State University, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Program AALS Supporters
    AALS.ORG/AM2017 #AALS2017 Program AALS Supporters Sustaining ($50,000 and above) Gold ($7,500 – $14,999) Access Group ABA Section of Legal Education and Law School Admission Council* Admissions to the Bar* West Academic Bloomberg Law* Carolina Academic Press* Lawdragon* Platinum ($15,000 – $49,999) Arnold & Porter Silver ($3,000 – $7,499) Covington & Burling Cravath Complete Equity Markets* K&L Gates Diablo Custom Publishing* Microsoft* The Froebe Group* National Association for Law Placement O’Melveny & Myers Bronze ($1,000 – $2,999) Paul Weiss Proskauer Boston University School of Law* Sidley Austin Clorox Starbucks iLaw* Sullivan & Cromwell The John Marshall Law School* Wachtell Santa Clara University School of Law* Williams & Connolly Stanford Law School* WilmerHale Texas Tech University School of Law* University of California, Hastings College of Law* University of Washington School of Law* University of Nevada, Las Vegas, William S. Boyd School of Law* William S. Hein, Co., Inc.* iLaw * 2017 Annual Meeting Sponsor 111th Annual Meeting WHY LAW MATTERS Tuesday, January 3 – Saturday, January 7, 2017 Hilton San Francisco Union Square | Parc 55 San Francisco – a Hilton Hotel aals.org/am2017 | #aals2017 Welcome to San Francisco for the 111th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Law Schools We are pleased to welcome you to San Francisco for the 111th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Law Schools. Our dynamic, vibrant schedule of programs has been planned to offer valuable information and professional development no matter where you are in your career. Our slate of events, formal and informal, and other opportunities will provide time to connect with colleagues from around the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Occum Inciment Et Fugia Nobitas Ditate Quam Neurolaw
    from SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2012 Volume 24, Issue 5 A publication of the American Society of Trial Consultants Foundation Occum inciment et fugia nobitas ditate quam Neurolaw: Trial Tips for Today and Game Changing Questions for the Future By Alison Bennett HE FUTURE OF LAW is standing on the courthouse steps. cannot predict the point in time at which the intersection of Neurolaw – the combination of neuroscience research technology and law will merge to create credible courtroom Tand the law – is worthy of attention for a number of evidence, we can look to neurolaw research today for research reasons. Neuroscientists are conducting ground-breaking findings that confirm current trial practice techniques and research with a machine called a functional MRI, or fMRI, offer new insights into jury decision making and the art of which is similar to traditional MRI technology but focuses on persuasion. brain activity, not just structure. Some would argue the use of neuroscientific evidence based on fMRI research is a premature Current Criminal Trial Applications adoption of a novel technology, but neurolaw evidence is already In the United States, neuroscientific evidence has been influencing jury trials in the United States and abroad. Billions admitted in over one hundred criminal trials now, has been of dollars are being pored into interdisciplinary neuroscience cited in at least one U. S. Supreme Court case, and is being research each year in the United States and abroad. While we admitted as evidence in other countries as well. In many cases, September/October 2012 - Volume 24, Issue 5 thejuryexpert.com 1 neuroscientific evidence was offered to mitigate sentencing “John grasped the object” and “Pablo kicked the ball.” by presenting neuroimaging highlighting brain damage that The scans revealed activity in the motor cortex, which could have diminished the perpetrator’s capacity and ability coordinates the body’s movements, indicating imagining to make rational decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Another Perspective on “Neurolaw”: the Use of Brain Imaging in Civil
    Another perspective on “neurolaw”: the use of brain imaging in civil litigation 233 Call Another perspective on “neurolaw”: the use of brain imaging in civil litigation regarding mental competence Sonia Desmoulin-Canselier ABSTRACT: The hypothesis of a rise of “neurolaw” shall not be accepted as an obvious and universal truth without taking civil cases and civil law into consideration. This ar- ticle is intended as a contribution to the discussion, analyzing rulings on cases which mentioned MRIs and brain scans as evidence to challenge the validity of civil legal in- struments, based on a claim of mental incompetence (also called “insanité”) in France and in the USA The aim of the study is to test an hypothetical “fascination ef- fect” on judges and to evaluate the true impact in civil jurisprudence of this type of evidence. KEYWORDS: Brain imaging; mental competence; civil litigation; comparison France/USA SOMMARIO: 1. Introduction – 2. Admitting brain images as evidence – 3. Evaluating the persuasiveness of brain images – 4. Conclusion. 1. Introduction n Western countries, genetic science and techniques profoundly modified important branches of criminal and civil law, leading scholars to revise fundamental legal concepts, such “the per- I son”, “parentage”, “proof” and “identity”1. Now they face potential new disruptions arising from the neurosciences. In the past few decades, progress in neuroimaging has provided new possi- bilities for visualizing and conceptualizing the anatomy and function of the brain – i.e. the biological substrate for the human “inner self”, “will”, “identity”, “responsibility” and “dignity”. Some legal scholars, dealing with the implications of these new findings and techniques, are outlining the con- cept of “neurolaw”, forged in the United States2 and now spreading all over the world3.
    [Show full text]
  • Neuroscience, Law, and Ethics T
    International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 65 (2019) 101459 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Journal of Law and Psychiatry journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijlawpsy Introduction Neuroscience, Law, and Ethics T In his influential Hardwired Behavior: What Neuroscience Reveals concerning the relevance of neurosciences to the law, especially crim- about Morality (2005), Laurence Tancredi combined neuroscience, inal law.” (Meynen, 2016, p. 3, Meynen, 2014; Morse & Roskies, 2013; psychology, philosophy, legal theory and clinical cases to insightfully Glenn & Raine, 2014; Chandler, 2018). One example is the use of examine the role of brain structure and function in moral behavior. neuroimaging to support behavioral evidence in judging whether a Analyzing how neurobiology shapes reasoning and decision-making, he person performing a criminal act met cognitive and volitional condi- discussed questions such as whether or to what extent we have free will tions necessary for criminal responsibility. Functional imaging re- and can be morally and criminally responsible for our actions. Is our cording abnormal activity in prefrontal-limbic pathways may indicate behavior hardwired and thus determined by the brain? Is free will an impaired cognitive and emotional processing and impaired capacity to illusion? Can mental content be explained entirely in terms of neural deliberate and consider the consequences of what one does or fails to content? If the brain influences but does not determine behavior, then do. This and other forms of imaging may eventually offer a more fine- how much of what we think and do is up to us? In his new book, grained account of impaired inhibitory mechanisms in the brain.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem with Neurolaw
    Saint Louis University Law Journal Volume 58 Number 2 (Winter 2014) Article 7 2014 The Problem with NeuroLaw David W. Opderbeck Seton Hall University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/lj Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation David W. Opderbeck, The Problem with NeuroLaw, 58 St. Louis U. L.J. (2014). Available at: https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/lj/vol58/iss2/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Saint Louis University Law Journal by an authorized editor of Scholarship Commons. For more information, please contact Susie Lee. SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW THE PROBLEM WITH NEUROLAW DAVID W. OPDERBECK* ABSTRACT This Article describes and critiques the increasingly popular program of reductive neuroLaw. Law has irrevocably entered the age of neuroscience. Various institutes and conferences are devoted to questions about the relation between neuroscience and legal procedures and doctrines. Most of the new “neuroLaw” scholarship focuses on evidentiary and related issues, and is important and beneficial. But some versions of reductive neuroLaw are frightening. Although they claim to liberate us from false conceptions of ourselves and to open new spaces for more scientific applications of the law, they end up stripping away all notions of “selves” and of “law.” This Article argues that a revitalized sense of transcendence is required to avoid the violent metaphysics of reductive neuroLaw and to maintain the integrity of both “law” and “science.” * Professor of Law, Seton Hall University Law School, and Director, Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology.
    [Show full text]
  • The Realities of Neurolaw: a Composition of Data & Research
    University of St. Thomas Journal of Law and Public Policy Volume 9 Issue 2 Spring 2015 Article 1 January 2015 The Realities of Neurolaw: A Composition of Data & Research Zurizadai Balmakund Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.stthomas.edu/ustjlpp Part of the Health Law and Policy Commons Recommended Citation Zurizadai Balmakund, The Realities of Neurolaw: A Composition of Data & Research, 9 U. ST. THOMAS J.L. & PUB. POL'Y 189 (2015). Available at: https://ir.stthomas.edu/ustjlpp/vol9/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UST Research Online and the University of St. Thomas Journal of Law and Public Policy. For more information, please contact the Editor-in-Chief at [email protected]. THE REALITIES OF NEUROLAW: A COMPOSITION OF DATA & RESEARCH ZURIZADAI BALMAKUND* "Matching neurological data to legal criteria can be much like performing a chemical analysis of a cheesecake to find out whether it was baked with love."' INTRODUCTION The purpose of the law is to protect the interests of society, and promote justice. The following paper explores how the interests of justice are challenged and strengthened by the introduction of interdisciplinary research. Today the integration of law and neuroscience is at the forefront of legal admissibility. Cognitive neuroscience has the potential to contribute a great deal to the legal profession, but the question is whether neuroscience is prepared to make those contributions right now.2 In order to answer this question, medical researchers, scholars, and legal professionals need to gauge whether neuroscience can measure criminal responsibility.
    [Show full text]
  • Will There Be a Neurolaw Revolution?
    Will There Be a Neurolaw Revolution? ∗ ADAM J. KOLBER The central debate in the field of neurolaw has focused on two claims. Joshua Greene and Jonathan Cohen argue that we do not have free will and that advances in neuroscience will eventually lead us to stop blaming people for their actions. Stephen Morse, by contrast, argues that we have free will and that the kind of advances Greene and Cohen envision will not and should not affect the law. I argue that neither side has persuasively made the case for or against a revolution in the way the law treats responsibility. There will, however, be a neurolaw revolution of a different sort. It will not necessarily arise from radical changes in our beliefs about criminal responsibility but from a wave of new brain technologies that will change society and the law in many ways, three of which I describe here: First, as new methods of brain imaging improve our ability to measure distress, the law will ease limitations on recoveries for emotional injuries. Second, as neuroimaging gives us better methods of inferring people’s thoughts, we will have more laws to protect thought privacy but less actual thought privacy. Finally, improvements in artificial intelligence will systematically change how law is written and interpreted. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 808 I. A WEAK CASE FOR A RESPONSIBILITY REVOLUTION.......................................... 809 A. THE FREE WILL IMPASSE ......................................................................... 809 B. GREENE AND COHEN’S NORMATIVE CLAIM ............................................. 810 C. GREENE AND COHEN’S PREDICTION ........................................................ 811 D. WHERE THEIR PREDICTION NEEDS STRENGTHENING .............................. 813 II. A WEAK CASE THAT LAW IS INSULATED FROM REVOLUTION ..........................
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of the United States
    no reactions indicative of deception. Htr. 44. Smith also testified that he was aware Davenport suffered a stroke sometime prior to 2006, did not have any record associated with the polygraph, and was now unavailable to answer questions about his conduct of the exam. Htr. 184-85. Smith also obtained two affidavits from Britt; one was executed on October 26,2005, the other in November 2005. Htr. 44-52; DX 5058; DX 5059. The October affidavit stated, in at least one paragraph, that Britt transported Stoeckley from Charleston to Raleigh; the November affidavit states that he transported her from Greenville to Raleigh. DX 5058 f 15; DX 5059 ^ 15; see also Htr. 40 (“Sometimes he said Charleston. Sometimes he said Greenville.”). The October affidavit also mentions what Britt felt was unethical behavior - Judge Dupree accepting cakes made by jurors - during the MacDonald trial. DX 5058 U 28. In February 2006, Britt executed an addendum to his affidavit, which included more detail than his previous affidavits. Htr. 199; GX 2089.34 Specifically, Britt stated that he and Holden transported Stoeckley to the courthouse on August 15,1979, for her interviews with the parties. GX 2089. He also stated that the defense interview of Stoeckley concluded around noon, and he then escorted her to the U.S. Attorney’s office. Britt again asserted that he was present during Stoeckley’s interview with the Government, and quoted Blackburn as telling her: “If you go downstairs and testify that you were at Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald’s house on the night of the murders, I will indict you as an accessory to murder.” Id.
    [Show full text]
  • Neurolaw Or Frankenlaw? the Thought Police Have Arrived Brain
    Volume 16, Issue 1 Summer 2011 Neurolaw or Frankenlaw? Brain-Friendly The Thought Police Have Arrived Case Stories By Larry Dossey, MD Part Two Reprinted with the author’s permission “This technology . opens up for the first time the possibility of punishing By Eric Oliver people for their thoughts rather than their actions.” —Henry T. Greely, bioethicist, Stanford Law School Without the aid of trained emotions the intellect is powerless against the animal organism.” Wonder Woman, the fabulous comic book heroine, wields a formidable - C. S. Lewis weapon called the Lasso of Truth. This magical lariat makes it impossible for anyone caught in it to lie. FIRST THINGS FIRST American psychologist William Moulton Marston created Wonder After the August, 1974 resig- Woman in 1941. He hit a nerve; Wonder Woman has been the most popular nation of Richard Nixon, an apoc- Continued on pg. 32 ryphal story began making the media rounds. It seems one of the major outlets had run a simple poll, asking respondents who they had voted for in the previous presi- dential race: McGovern or Nixon. have a most productive and practical contribution According to the results, Nixon had to share with you from my friend and consulting lost to “President” McGovern by a colleague, Amy Pardieck, from Perceptual Litigation. No stranger to these pages, Katherine James, landslide! Whether it is true or not, of ACT of Communication, makes the case that ac- the story rings of verisimilitude. Hi All – tors and directors have known for decades what tri- What the pollsters didn’t measure, Welcome to the second issue of the new al attorneys interested in bridging the gap between and which would have been much Mental Edge.
    [Show full text]
  • The New BRAIN
    SPECIAL EDITION The New BRAIN MACLEAN’S EBOOK Contents Introduction Join us for a giant brainstorming session on what the world’s neuroscience superstars are keeping top of mind The glia club Once dismissed as ‘glue,’ glial cells, neuron’s little brother, have become the lodestone of brain research. But is it a good idea for scientists to herd in one direction? Charlie Gillis How to build a brain A philosopher and engineer has created the most complex simulated brain in the world. On $30,000 a year. Nick Taylor-Vaisey Mad beauty A conceptual photographer dusts off the jars of a brain collection from a Texas mental hospital David Graham They grow up so fast The latest research on a baby’s remarkable brain development, from recognizing right and wrong to the gift of memory Rosemary Counter Gone baby gone Why don’t we remember anything from earliest childhood? It’s called infantile amnesia. Emma Teitel MACLEAN’S EBOOK THE NEW BRAIN Memory and gender Emma Teitel The young and the restless No one knows why autistic kids are often night owls, but their parents can take heart: science is looking at some biological causes based in the brain Katherine DeClerq Crying out for attention How one psychologist is offering hope to parents worried about the stigma, safety and side effects of ADHD medication Hannah Hoag Mind the age gap Previously dismissed as lesser or defective, new research is revealing that the teenage brain is just as powerful as any adult’s Rosemary Counter No brawn, no brains Genetics may decide your upper and lower limits for cognitive
    [Show full text]
  • The Potential Contribution of Neuroscience to the Criminal Justice System of New Zealand
    1 The Potential Contribution of Neuroscience to the CriminalJustice System of New Zealand SARAH MURPHY I INTRODUCTION Descriptions of "neurolaw", the legal discipline governing the intersection of law and neuroscience, span a continuum from "contribut[ing] nothing more than new details"' to ushering in "the greatest intellectual catastrophe in the history of our species". This controversy is not unwarranted. The "technological wizardry"3 of modern neuroscience tracks the movement of fluids and electrical currents, revealing both structure and organic functioning, and is the closest humans have come to "mind reading". While not unwarranted, the controversy's reactionary nature gives the misleading impression that neurolaw is a modem invention. In fact, neurolaw's historical roots are evident in the law's foundational preoccupation with concepts of mens rea and moral desert.' Connections between criminal behaviour and brain injury appeared as early as 1848,1 with biological positivism making formal - and sinister - progress at the end of the 19th century.6 Current legal applications of neuroscience both continue this story and reflect a wider trend of science gaining popular trust and interest from the courts.' Such applications have been proposed t Winner of the 2011 Minter Ellison Rudd Watts Prize for Legal Writing. * BSc (Biological Sciences)/LLB(Hons). The author would like to thank Professor Warren Brookbanks of the University of Auckland Faculty of Law, for his advice during the writing of this dissertation and an earlier, related research paper. I Joshua Greene and Jonathan Cohen "For the law, neuroscience changes nothing and everything" (2004) 359 Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 1775 at 1775.
    [Show full text]