Deceptively Simple: Framing, Intuition, and Judicial Gatekeeping of Forensic Feature-Comparison Methods Evidence

This Article explains how courts have skirted the reliability problem of FCM evidence and argues that judges perceive the question of FCM evidence to be a simple problem that cross-examination can solve. Relying on insights from cognitive science to help explain the resistance of the courts to FCM evidence challenges, the Article urges courts to recognize the complexity of FCM evidence and refocus on the danger such evidence poses for continued wrongful conviction. By framing the admissibility of FCM evidence as an “easy” question, courts are relying on heuristics—that is, shortcuts—to solve complex problems. As this Article explains, using heuristics can lead to more error-prone decisions, as such shortcuts are vulnerable to various cognitive biases and systemic fallacies. In both reasoning and language, courts exhibit biased-affected decision-making. Part I of the Article briefly reviews the NRC report and the PCAST report while Part II discusses cases addressing FCM evidence. The cognitive science that may explain the courts’ consistent approaches to the evidence is considered in Part III. Part III then applies these concepts to judicial decision-making related to FCM evidence—a complicated problem in need of greater analysis

Sources of Unreliable Testimony from Children

We distilled research findings on sources of unreliable testimony from children into four principles that capture how the field of forensic developmental psychology conceptualizes this topic. The studies selected to illustrate these principles address three major questions: (a) how do young children perform in eyewitness studies, (b) why are some children less accurate than others, and (c) what phenomena generate unreliable testimony? Throughout our research, our focus is on factors other than lying that produce inaccurate or seemingly inconsistent autobiographical reports.Collectively, this research has shown that (a) children’s eyewitness accuracy is highly dependent on context, (b) neurological immaturity makes children vulnerable to errors under some circumstances, and (c) some children are more swayed by external influences than others. Finally, the diversity of factors that can influence the reliability of children’s testimony dictates that (d) analyzing children’s testimony as if they were adults (i.e., with adult abilities, sensibilities, and motivations) will lead to frequent misunderstandings. It takes considerable knowledge of development—including information about developmental psycholinguistics, memory development, and the gradual emergence of cognitive control—to work with child witnesses and to analyze cases as there are many sources of unreliable testimony

Subjective and Non-subjective Information in Children’s Allegations of Abuse

In this study, we were interested in how interviewers elicit subjective information in investigations of child abuse (e.g., descriptions of thoughts, emotions, opinions). Sixty-one interviews of children aged 4-12 years old were analyzed to determine the amount of subjective information versus non-subjective event details reported, and the type of question that elicited the information. Interviewers elicited more non-subjective than subjective information, although there was more focus on subjective information in the rapport-building phase than in the substantive phase when the allegations were elicited. Interviewer prompts and child responsiveness was congruent such that non-subjective questions elicited more non-subjective information, and subjective interviewer questions elicited more subjective information. The presence of subjective information in children’s testimony can influence children’s credibility, and the results of this study demonstrate that forensic interviewers play a significant part in the level of subjective information children provide

Seeing Voices: Potential Neuroscience Contributions to a Reconstruction of Legal Insanity

Part I of this Article explains the insanity defense in the United States. Next, Part II discusses some of the brain-based research about mental illness, focusing on schizophrenia research. Then, Part III looks at traumatic brain injury and the relationship among injury, cognition, and behavior. Finally, Part IV explains how a new neuroscience-informed standard might better inform our moral decision making about legal insanity

An educational paradigm for teaching computer forensics

Teaching Computer Forensics to students at postgraduate and undergraduate levels is a challenge. Creating an assignment that is both realistic and also helpful to students when pursuing careers in this competitive area is also a demanding task for the lecturer. A problem-based learning (PBL) strategy has been used to increase the employability of the students, by designing a real-world problem for the students to solve. It can be shown that this enhances the employability skills of the students when it comes to finding jobs. The coursework is based around a case study. To add an extra dimension to the assessment we involved final year Law students from the School of Humanities, Law Department, to act as jury members and also to help to cross-examine the postgraduate students while they presented their findings in the role of an Expert Witness. This created at the same time a valuable exercise for the legal students in the context that evidence presented in courts is increasingly computer-based evidence. This paper discusses the preparation of the evidence files, how employability is enhanced by the use of a PBL approach to teaching, the process of evaluating the results of the students work and concludes with an overview of the student experience for all students involved

Children\u27s cognitive processing of abuse as described in investigative interviews.

A great deal of research has examined ways in which investigative interviewers can elicit accurate information from children. More recently, research has studied children’s own thoughts or comprehension of abuse, and how these types of statements relate to disclosure, others’ perceptions of child witnesses, and psychological trauma. However, little research has investigated multiple types of children’s thoughts about abuse as they occur in an actual investigative interview. The current study examined seven types of statements children made about their abuse in a sample of 86 transcripts of investigative interviews conducted by Child Protective Services and a police department in a mid-sized Ontario city. Children interviewed ranged from 4- to 17-years-of-age, with approximately equal numbers of males and females. Type of abuse disclosed in the interviews ranged from verbal abuse to sexual abuse. Two coders independently coded each transcript for seven statement types: expected consequences of disclosure, actual consequences of disclosure, minimization, justification for either self, perpetrator, or other, and blame. Whether the statements were elicited by an interviewer prompt or mentioned spontaneously by the child was also coded. Results demonstrated that children blamed the perpetrator more than any other statement type, consistent with previous research. Analyses also revealed a significant relationship between abuse type and children’s statements, and alleged perpetrator and children’s statements. Results from the current study have implications for disclosure, treatment of psychological trauma, and how parents, social workers, police officers, attorneys, and judges view children’s statements

Proving Genocide? Forensic Expertise and the ICTY

This article works towards developing a theoretical framework outlining the premises and parameters under which forensic experts operate during various stages of international criminal investigations and the presentation of expert witness testimony in court.With reference to law and science literature, the article explores the reasons for undertaking resource-intensive forensic investigations; secondly it outlines the ways in which evidence is gathered and interpreted, the process of constructing ‘forensic truth’; and finally it examines what happens to ‘forensic truth’ once it enters the legal arena. The International Criminal Tribunal for the formerYugoslavia and its activities are used to illustrate the issues involved during the ‘forensic expertise meets international law’ interface. Specifically the forensic exhumations conducted around the Srebrenica events of July 1995 and their use in the Krstic¤ trial serve to contextualize the debate

Who is Andrea Yates? A Short Story About Insanity

On June 20, 2001, Andrea Yates drowned her four children in a bathtub. At Andrea’s trial, in Harris County, Texas, the prosecution’s star expert, Patrick Dietz, appeared particularly adept at persuading the jury to accept the prosecution’s assertion that Andrea was sane and acting intentionally when she killed her children. This Article analyzes the problematic aspects of Dietz\u27s testimony in an effort to contribute some balance to the Andrea Yates story. Despite the long history of expert witnesses in criminal trials, the justice system should question the fairness and efficacy of such an unregulated storytelling process. Part I of this Article briefly discusses Andrea\u27s life up to her marriage as well as the outcome of her trial. Part II provides an overview of the insanity defense and the strict Texas insanity standard. Part III examines Dietz\u27s background, his reputation, and his psychiatric philosophy, in addition to his proclivity to testify for the prosecution. Part IV describes Andrea\u27s history of mental illness, especially her postpartum psychosis that started with the birth of her first child and ended with a severe psychotic episode. Part V focuses on Dietz\u27s testimony in the Yates trial, beginning with his pre-trial interview with Andrea and ending with an analysis of his conclusions. The discussion emphasizes the speculative nature of many of Dietz\u27s statements and their lack of connection to Andrea\u27s history of mental illness. Part VI presents the other perspectives and experts in the Yates case, and considers how the case might have reached a different result with a more consistent defense strategy or a less rigid insanity standard

Evaluating Future Dangerousness and Need for Treatment: The Roles of Expert Testimony, Attributional Complexity, and Victim Type

In the current study, we explored the effect of risk-assessment testimony, attributional complexity, and victim type on participants’ perceptions of the dangerousness of a sexually violent person and his need for treatment. Participants read details of a hypothetical sexual assault of a female minor and of an adult. Expert testimony of his risk assessment consisted of clinical opinion versus structured-clinical judgment (SCJ) versus actuarial assessment. Participants perceived clinical-opinion and SCJ testimony as equally influential when forming judgments of future dangerousness. In the context of treatment, however, participants relied on actuarial testimony when judging potential for risk. In addition, attributional complexity (AC) moderated perceptions of sexual risk. Overall, results point to the need for continued refinement of assessment techniques when determining dangerousness and need for treatment