Why Brain Images Should Not Be Used in US Criminal Trials

In David Boonin, Katrina L. Sifferd, Tyler K. Fagan, Valerie Gray Hardcastle, Michael Huemer, Daniel Wodak, Derk Pereboom, Stephen J. Morse, Sarah Tyson, Mark Zelcer, Garrett VanPelt, Devin Casey, Philip E. Devine, David K. Chan, Maarten Boudry, Christopher Freiman, Hrishikesh Joshi, Shelley Wilcox, Jason Brennan, Eric Wiland, Ryan Muldoon, Mark Alfano, Philip Robichaud, Kevin Timpe, David Livingstone Smith, Francis J. Beckwith, Dan Hooley, Russell Blackford, John Corvino, Corey McCall, Dan Demetriou, Ajume Wingo, Michael Shermer, Ole Martin Moen, Aksel Braanen Sterri, Teresa Blankmeyer Burke, Jeppe von Platz, John Thrasher, Mary Hawkesworth, William MacAskill, Daniel Halliday, Janine O’Flynn, Yoaav Isaacs, Jason Iuliano, Claire Pickard, Arvin M. Gouw, Tina Rulli, Justin Caouette, Allen Habib, Brian D. Earp, Andrew Vierra, Subrena E. Smith, Danielle M. Wenner, Lisa Diependaele, Sigrid Sterckx, G. Owen Schaefer, Markus K. Labude, Harisan Unais Nasir, Udo Schuklenk, Benjamin Zolf & Woolwine (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Philosophy and Public Policy. Springer Verlag. pp. 25-37 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The data discussed strongly suggest that neural imaging does not unduly sway judges and jurors; in fact, it is often counterproductive. The percentage of appellate cases in which the decision was favorable to defendants with brain scan data mirrored those of decisions without such proffered evidence. Moreover, fully two-thirds of the scans admitted were either inconclusive or showed normal brain structures. In decisions referencing brain scans, judges mentioned defendant behavior significantly more often than they referred to the defendant’s brain. Finally, in the actual decisions themselves, judges often ignored relevant imaging data in favor of case precedent or misinterpreted the data so that they would fit with the judges’ initial reactions and opinions.

Categories

Add categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1007/978-3-319-93907-0_3

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,963

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

The Limitations and Potential of Neuroimaging in the Criminal Law.Walter Glannon - 2014 - The Journal of Ethics 18 (2):153-170.
Group-to-individual (G2i) inferences: challenges in modeling how the U.S. court system uses brain data.Valerie Gray Hardcastle - 2020 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 28 (1):51-68.
Intellectual Disability, Brain Damage, and Group-to-Individual Inferences.Valerie Gray Hardcastle - 2018 - Balkan Journal of Philosophy 10 (1):5-16.
Brain Images as Legal Evidence.Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Adina Roskies, Teneille Brown & Emily Murphy - 2008 - Episteme 5 (3):359-373.
Can Brain Scans Prove Criminals Unaccountable?Rebecca Roache - 2014 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 5 (2):35-37.
A system architecture for sharing de-identified, research-ready brain scans and health information across clinical imaging centers.A. L. Chervenak, T. G. M. Van Erp, C. Kesselman, M. D'Arcy, J. Sobell, D. Keator, L. Dahm, J. Murry, M. Law, A. Hasso, J. Ames, F. MacCiardi & S. G. Potkin - unknown
Is It Me or My Brain? Depression and Neuroscientific Facts.Joseph Dumit - 2003 - Journal of Medical Humanities 24 (1/2):35-47.
(A)e(s)th(et)ics of Brain Imaging. Visibilities and Sayabilities in Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Hannah Fitsch - 2011 - Neuroethics 5 (3):275-283.
Two kinds of theory-laden cognitive processes: Distinguishing intransigence from dogmatism.Elias L. Khalil - 2013 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (3):218-219.
Does your brain use the images in it, and if so, how?Daniel C. Dennett - 2002 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (2):189-190.
Translating Scientific Evidence into the Language of the ‘Folk’: Executive Function as Capacity-Responsibility.Katrina L. Sifferd - 2013 - In Nicole A. Vincent (ed.), Legal Responsibility and Neuroscience. Oxford University Press.
Traumatic Brain Injury, Neuroscience, and the Legal System.Valerie Gray Hardcastle - 2014 - Neuroethics 8 (1):55-64.
Hardwired Behavior: What Neuroscience Reveals About Morality.Laurence Tancredi - 2005 - Cambridge University Press.
Compulsory brain scans and genetic tests for boxers--or should boxing be banned?M. Spriggs - 2004 - Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (5):515-516.
What do brain data really show?Valerie Gray Hardcastle & C. Matthew Stewart - 2002 - Philosophy of Science 69 (3):572-582.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-06-17

Downloads
10 (#1,194,153)

6 months
1 (#1,471,551)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Valerie G. Hardcastle
University of Cincinnati

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references