Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Can Brain Scans Prove Criminals Unaccountable?Rebecca Roache - unknown
    Leonard Berlin reports that neuroscientific data have been presented in court by lawyers wishing to argue that their clients have reduced or absent moral responsibility for their behaviour because their brain function is impaired. Berlin cites evidence showing that such neuroscientific data can influence judges to pass more lenient sentences, and he anticipates that advances in “the neurology of criminal behavior” may lead courts to view certain criminals as having reduced accountability for their actions. Similarly, an advisor to President Obama (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Limitations and Potential of Neuroimaging in the Criminal Law.Walter Glannon - 2014 - The Journal of Ethics 18 (2):153-170.
    Neuroimaging showing brain abnormalities is increasingly being introduced in criminal court proceedings to argue that a defendant could not control his behavior and should not be held responsible for it. But imaging has questionable probative value because it does not directly capture brain function or a defendant’s mental states at the time of a criminal act. Advanced techniques could transform imaging from a coarse-grained measure of correlations between brain states and behavior to a fine-grained measure of causal connections between them. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations