The Law and Neuroscience Blog

Neuroprediction, Violence, and the Law

I have a forthcoming paper with Stephanos Bibas, Scott Grafton, Kent Kiehl, Andrew Mansfield, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, and Michael Gazzaniga entitled "Neuroprediction, Violence, and the Law: Setting the Stage," that is available as an "on-line first" draft on Neuroethics. 

Here is the abstract:

In this paper, our goal is to (a) survey some of the legal contexts within which violence risk assessment already plays a prominent role, (b) explore whether developments in neuroscience could potentially be used to improve our ability to predict violence, and (c) discuss whether neuropredictive models of violence create any unique legal or moral problems above and beyond the well worn problems already associated with prediction more generally. In “Violence Risk Assessment and the Law”, we briefly examine the role currently played by predictions of violence in three high stakes legal contexts: capital sentencing (“Violence Risk Assessment and Capital Sentencing”), civil commitment hearings (“Violence Risk Assessment and Civil Commitment”), and “sexual predator” statutes (“Violence Risk Assessment and Sexual Predator Statutes”). In “Clinical vs. Actuarial Violence Risk Assessment”, we briefly examine the distinction between traditional clinical methods of predicting violence and more recently developed actuarial methods, exemplified by the Classification of Violence Risk (COVR) software created by John Monahan and colleagues as part of the MacArthur Study of Mental Disorder and Violence [1]. In “The Neural Correlates of Psychopathy”, we explore what neuroscience currently tells us about the neural correlates of violence, using the recent neuroscientific research on psychopathy as our focus. We also discuss some recent advances in both data collection (“Cutting-Edge Data Collection: Genetically Informed Neuroimaging”) and data analysis (“Cutting-Edge Data Analysis: Pattern Classification”) that we believe will play an important role when it comes to future neuroscientific research on violence. In “The Potential Promise of Neuroprediction”, we discuss whether neuroscience could potentially be used to improve our ability to predict future violence. Finally, in “The Potential Perils of Neuroprediction”, we explore some potential evidentiary (“Evidentiary Issues”), constitutional (“Constitutional Issues”), and moral (“Moral Issues”) issues that may arise in the context of the neuroprediction of violence.

 

Kurzweil et al. on the Ethics of Human Enhancement

Religion and Ethics Newsweekly has posted a recent interview with Ray Kurzweil, Christian Brugger, John Donoghue, and others about the "Ethics of Human Enhancement."

How Neuroscience is Changing the Law

Big Think has a recent piece that incorporates an interview with our own Owen Jones entitled, "How Neuroscience is Changing the Law."

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. 

The Neurobiology of Evil

Big Think has posted a recent interview with Michael Stone entitled "The Neurobiology of Evil."  If you haven't checked out Big Think before, you should also watch some of their other fascinating interviews with folks like Kwame Appiah, Antonio Damasio, Joseph LeDoux, Alfred Mele, and others.

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).

A Judge's Guide to Neuroscience

The Law and Neuroscience Project (along with the SAGE Center at UCSB) recently published A Judge's Guide to Neuroscience:  A Concise Introduction.  The useful manual contains articles by Marcus Raichle, Michael Gazzaniga, Adina Roskies, Read Montague, Scott Grafton, and others.  As always, happy reading!

Pardo and Patterson on Neurolaw

Michael Pardo and Dennis Patterson have a very interesting forthcoming piece in Neuroethics entitled "Minds, Brains, and Norms."  I was fortunate enough to be asked to provide some invited commentary along with Walter Glannon and Carl Craven.  Pardo and Patterson's lead article is now available for preview (see here) along with some of the invited commentary (see here and here).  Finally, their reply is also available here.  Thanks to Neil Levy and Walter Sinnott-Armstrong for inviting me to play along and for putting together this special issue!

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

Kiehl, Morse, and Others on Psychopathy and the Law

Radio Health Journal has a series of interesting interviews with Kent Kiehl, Stephen Morse, and others concerning psychopathy, neuroscience, and the law.  Go here to listen to the recording (beginning at the 2 minute mark).