Neuroscientific evidence has an increasing impact on fact-finding in criminal proceedings. Yet, the reliability of neuroscientific knowledge cannot be entrusted entirely to the experts but must be inspected within the trial, according to its principles, rules, and epistemological canons. Legal scholarship has mainly focused on the decision- making powers of the judge who must admit neuroscientific techniques at trial as being able, for example, to provide a useful contribution to the ascertainment of facts. In this perspective, we should also look at the parties in the proceedings, asking ourselves if they have a right – which in turn complements the judge’s duties – to have specific issues ascertained through the contribution of the neuroscience.
NEUROSCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE AND ITS EFFECTS ON THE PRINCIPLES OF EQUALITY OF ARMS AND INTIME CONVICTION IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
Antonella FalconePrimo
2023-01-01
Abstract
Neuroscientific evidence has an increasing impact on fact-finding in criminal proceedings. Yet, the reliability of neuroscientific knowledge cannot be entrusted entirely to the experts but must be inspected within the trial, according to its principles, rules, and epistemological canons. Legal scholarship has mainly focused on the decision- making powers of the judge who must admit neuroscientific techniques at trial as being able, for example, to provide a useful contribution to the ascertainment of facts. In this perspective, we should also look at the parties in the proceedings, asking ourselves if they have a right – which in turn complements the judge’s duties – to have specific issues ascertained through the contribution of the neuroscience.Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
